Zsolt Petko and Zsuzsanna Adam v. Carelton Courtyard ( 2018 )

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON ORDER ON FURTHER MOTION FOR REHEARING Appellate case name: Zsolt Petko and Zsuzsanna Adam v. Carelton Courtyard Appellate case number: 01-17-00918-CV Trial court case number: CV-0077741 Trial court: County Court at Law No. 2 of Galveston County The panel has voted to deny appellants’ pro se Request for Explanation, filed on July 9, 2018, and Complaint, filed on July 12, 2018, construed together as a further motion for rehearing of this Court’s July 3, 2018 Order denying appellants’ Motion for Rehearing.1 It is ordered that the further motion for rehearing is denied. Judge’s signature: /s/ Laura C. Higley Acting for the Panel Panel consists of: Justices Jennings, Keyes, and Higley. Date: July 24, 2018 1 Although this Court did not modify or vacate its judgment or issue a different opinion, because the appellants are proceeding pro se, this Court uses Rule 2 to suspend the normal operation of Rule 49.5 and construes their filings together as a further motion for rehearing. See TEX. R. APP. P. 2, 49.5. While the Rules of Appellate Procedure only require this Court to give reasons for resolving an appeal in its opinion, which it already did in its April 3, 2018 memorandum opinion, the rules do not require this Court to give any reasons for denying a motion for rehearing. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4, 49.3. In any event, while there was no letter filed by the appellants with the Clerk of this Court on March 12, 2018, according to the Galveston County Clerk’s Office website, there was a complaint filed by appellants there on March 9, 2018, which was addressed to the district clerk. The Clerk of this Court generally marks every appeal as “Submitted” at least one day before issuing the Court’s opinion and judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 39.8, 43.1.