Don R. Johnson and Freddie L. Oliver v. Texas Serenity Academy, Inc. D/B/A Texas Serenity Academy Charter School ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                                     ACCEPTED
    1-14-00438
    FIRST COURT OF APPEALS
    HOUSTON, TEXAS
    4/27/2015 3:41:37 PM
    CHRISTOPHER PRINE
    CLERK
    COURT of APPEALS
    FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF TEXAS
    HOUSTON, TEXAS                              FILED IN
    DON R. JOHNSON AND FREDDIE L. OLIVER   (                                1st COURT OF APPEALS
    HOUSTON, TEXAS
    APPEALLANTS                            (
    4/27/2015 3:41:37 PM
    (
    V.                                     (         CASE: 01-14-00438-CV   CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE
    Clerk
    (        HONORABLE JUSTICES
    (
    (
    (
    TEXAS SERENITY ACADEMY INC             (
    D/B/A TEXAS SERENITY ACADEMY            (
    CHARTER SCHOOL                         (
    APPEALEE                               (
    (
    APPEALLANTS DON R. JOHNSON AND FREDDIE L. OLIVER FILES AND MAKE
    OBJECTION TO TSA’S FILING OF THE 215TH DISTRICT COURT DOCKET CONTROL
    ORDER FILED ON APRIL 23, 2015.
    NOW COMES Appellants Don R. Johnson (“Johnson”) and Freddie L. Oliver
    (“Oliver”) files a motion to the First Court of Appeals respectfully making an
    objecting to Appellee’s filing a 215th District Court Docket control order on April
    23, 2015 during the Appellants Johnson’s and Oliver’s appeal phase. On March
    27, 2015 Appellant Johnson and Oliver filed a motion to request a Rehearing
    based on constitutional issues, namely the 14th amendment related to TRCP 21,
    21(a) and 165(a). The First Court of Appeals (CA) accepted the request on March
    30, 2015. As of April 27, 2015, Appellants Johnson and Oliver await the CA’s
    ruling on this motion. Appellants Johnson and Oliver is making this objection
    based on the fact that TSA Appellee is attempting to further violate Appellants
    Johnson’s and Oliver’s right to due process by prematurely filing a Docket Control
    1
    Order for a hearing on June 29, 2015 to avoid a trial by Jury in 215th District court
    and request a hearing by Judge only, when the First Court of Appeals has not
    ruled on the Appellants ‘motion for Rehearing request.
    STATEMENT OF FACTS: The mandate is the document issued by the Court of
    Appeals to the trial court directing the enforcement of the Court of Appeal’s
    judgment. See Texas Park & Wildlife Dept. v. Dearing, 
    240 S.W.3d 330
    , 347 (Tex-
    App-Austin 2007, pet. Denied); see also Black’s Law Dictionary 1047 (9th ed.2009)
    (mandate is a judicial order issued by higher court directing lower court to take
    action). Once the deadline for appealing to the Supreme Court has passed or the
    Supreme has denied the petition for review, the clerk of the Court of Appeals’
    court will issue the court’s mandate pursuant to TRAP 18.1. The CA judgment
    becomes enforceable only after the mandate is issued. “The trial court should
    look to Appellate Court’s opinion for guidance on how to proceed.” See Hudson
    v. Wakefield, 
    711 S.W.2d 628
    , 630 (Tex. 1986); Cessna 
    Aircraft, 345 S.W.3d at 144
    . Pursuant to TRAP 18.1 the clerk of the Court of Appeals will issue the
    mandate no earlier than 70 days after the Court of Appeals last ruling on all
    timely filed motions for Rehearing or en Banc Reconsideration, if no party files
    (1) a petition for review in the Supreme Court or (2) a motion to extend the time
    to file a petition for review. Pursuant to TRAP 53.7 (a) 45 days from Court of
    Appeals overruling motion for Rehearing or en Banc Reconsideration to file
    petition for review), TRAP 53.7 (f) 15 days from date the petition is due in
    Supreme Court to file petition. If the Court of Appeals issues a new Judgment on
    2.
    Rehearing, Appellants Johnson and Oliver may file further motions for Rehearing,
    and a mandate will not be issued until after those motions are decided. See TRAP
    49.5 “Additional Motions for Rehearing,”
    The clerk will issue the mandate of the of the Court of Appeals no earlier than 40
    days after the Supreme Court denies review, if Appellants Johnson and Oliver do
    not file (1) a motion for Rehearing of the Supreme Court’s order on the petition
    or (2) file a motion to extend the time to file a motion for Rehearing in the
    Supreme Court. If the Texas Supreme Court denies the petition for review,
    petitioners Johnson and Oliver may move that the Court of Appeals stay the
    mandate pending disposition of a petition for writ of certiorari in the U.S.
    Supreme Court pursuant to TRAP 18.2.
    CONCLUSION AND PRAYER:
    Appellants Johnson and Oliver declares that the Jun 29, 2015 date is premature
    and unreasonable , in addition, to being illegal because the 215th District court
    has not received a court mandate from the higher court (CA) who has the
    jurisdiction and plenary authority (full) over this case. A case cannot be executed
    in the jurisdiction and plenary authority of 2 courts at the same time. To act
    outside the authority/jurisdiction of the First Court of Appeals in this case in any
    manner is without grounds and further violates these Appellants right to due
    process under Texas Rules of Appeals Procedures.
    The minimum time to exhaust Appellants Johnson’s and Oliver’s appeal process
    is 70 days after the last judgment issued by the First Court of Appeals. Therefore,
    TSA’s motion for a Docket Control Order scheduled for June 29, 2015, is made
    objectionable and Appellants pray that the court “Strike down” the Appellee’s
    3.
    Docket Control Order motion. Appellant pray that the CA issue a mandate after
    Appellant Johnson and Oliver has exhausted the appeal process ordering the Trial
    Court to set this case for trial by jury after it receives the mandate. Appellant prays
    that the CA orders the trial court to grant discovery on the issues it has remanded
    back to the trial court and to grant time for Appellant/Defendant to respond to the
    motions Appellee/Plaintiff must file to fix the remand the CA has denied.
    RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
    //S// Don R. Johnson
    DON R. JOHNSON, PRO SE
    APPELLANT
    25619 Alp Springs
    SPRING, TEXAS 77373
    832-444-4834
    //S// Freddie L. Oliver
    FREDDIE L. OLIVER, PRO SE
    AAPPELLANT
    11006 LONG GATE
    HOUSTON, TEXAS 77047
    713-385-9720
    4.
    Certificate of Service
    I Don R. Johnson, Pro se and Freddie L. Oliver hereby certify that on April 27,
    2015 a notice of this Request for making objection to the Docket Control Order
    was sent to Texas Serenity Academy Inc. d/b/a Texas Serenity Academy Charter
    School through the organization’s attorney, Ms. Tina M. Andrews by U.S. mail.
    Texas Serenity Academy
    Tina M. Andrews
    P.O. Box 655
    Bellaire, TX 77402
    E-mail: tina.andrews26@,gmail.com
    //S// Don R. Johnson
    ___________________
    Don R. Johnson                        4/27/2015
    //S // Freddie L. Oliver
    ___________________
    Freddie L. Oliver                    4/27/2015
    5.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-14-00438-CV

Filed Date: 4/27/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/29/2016