CAUSE NO. 06-15-00014-CV 

__________________________________________________________________ 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SIXTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, TEXARKANA DIVISION 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 WILLIAM H. SCURLOCK § 

 § 

 v. § 

 § 

 JOHN M. HUBBARD § 

__________________________________________________________________ 

APPELLANT’S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE’S 

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF, OR 

ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO ABATE, AND 

APPELLANT’S MOTION TO GIVE APPEAL PRECEDENCE 

__________________________________________________________________ 

 

 Cory J. Floyd 

 Texas Bar No. 24049365 

cory@nortonandwood.com 

 

Cammy R. Kennedy 

 Texas Bar No. 24079245 

cammy@nortonandwood.com 

 

 NORTON & WOOD, L.L.P. 

 315 Main Street 

 Texarkana, Texas 75501 

 Phone: (903) 823-1321 

 FAX: (903) 823-1325 

 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT, 

 WILLIAM H. SCURLOCK 

ACCEPTED

06-15-00014-CV

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

4/10/2015 6:39:52 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 4/10/2015 6:39:52 PM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
1 

APPELLANT’S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO 

FILE REPLY BRIEF, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO ABATE, AND 

APPELLANT’S MOTION TO GIVE APPEAL PRECEDENCE

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: 

 COMES NOW, Appellant WILLIAM H. SCURLOCK, who files 

this Response to Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time to File Reply Brief, 

or Alternatively, Motion to Abate, and Appellant’s Motion to Give 

Appeal Precedence, and shows unto the Court as follows: 

 Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time to File Brief Should Be Denied 

1. Appellant asks this Court to deny Appellee’s Motion to 

Extend Time to File his brief, or in the alternative, limit any extension 

of time to seven (7) days. A seven (7) day extension would extend 

Appellee’s deadline to file his brief until April 16, 2015. 

2. The Court has the authority under Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure 38.6(d) to extend the time for an appellee to file a brief; 

however, because this appeal concerns a wrongful receivership over 

Appellant’s business, Pecan Point Brewing Company, as long as the 

receivership remains in place, Appellant suffers harm under the trial 

court’s order. 
2 

3. Appellant filed his brief on March 19, 2015, and Appellee’s 

brief was due on or before April 9, 2015. 

4. Appellee’s reasoning for seeking this extension, “because 

Appellee Hubbard moved for dismissal of Appellant’s interlocutory 

appeal for lack of jurisdiction of this Court...[and] that motion is 

pending with the Court,” presumes that this Court requires additional 

time to hear Appellee’s prior motion when, to Appellant’s knowledge, no 

additional time has been requested. As such, Appellee’s reasoning is an 

insufficient explanation for the delay in Appellee’s preparation and 

filing of his brief. 

5. Texas courts have held that when a party presents an 

insufficient explanation for the need for additional time the party’s 

motion may be denied. See Hykonnen v. Baker Hughes Bus. Support 

Services, 93 S.W.3d 562, 564 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no 

pet.); Simon v. Dillard's, Inc., 86 S.W.3d 798, 800 (Tex. App.—Houston 

[1st Dist.] 2002, no pet.); Chilkewitz v. Winter, 25 S.W.3d 382, 383 (Tex. 

App.—Fort Worth 2000, no pet.); Kidd v. Paxton, 1 S.W.3d 309, 311 

(Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, no pet.); Weik v. Second Baptist Church of 

Houston, 988 S.W.2d 437, 439 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. 
3 

denied); Velasquez v. Harrison, 934 S.W.2d 767, 770 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] 1996, no writ); Furr v. Furr, 721 S.W.2d 565, 567 

(Tex. App.—Amarillo 1986, no writ); and Dawson v. First Cont'l Real 

Estate Inv. Trust, 590 S.W.2d 560, 563 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston [1st 

Dist.] 1979, no writ). 

6. Accordingly, Appellant asks this Court to deny Appellee’s 

request for an extension to file his brief or, in the alternative, grant only 

a seven (7) day extension, extending the deadline for Appellee’s brief to 

April 16, 2015. 

 Appellee’s Motion to Abate Should Be Denied 

7. Appellee requests that, in the alternative, this Court abate 

the appeal so that the trial court has an opportunity to consider 

Appellee’s motion to modify the judgment previously filed in the trial 

court proceedings. 

8. Not only would allowing an abatement of this case defeat the 

purpose of an accelerated appeal, but Appellee also fails to cite any 

grounds or authority which support his bid to abate this matter until 

the trial court is able to issue an order correcting any prior mistakes. 
4 

9. Filing a postjudgment motion which seeks to reform or 

modify a judgment with the trial court does not extend the timetable for 

an accelerated appeal. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b(e), see Tex. R. App. P. 

28.1(b). 

10. Accordingly, Appellant asks this Court to deny Appellee’s 

Motion to Abate. 

 Appellant Moves to Give This Appeal Precedence 

11. Appellant filed his Docketing Statement on February 23, 

2015, reflecting that this is an accelerated appeal in accordance with 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 28.1(a), and further stated that this 

appeal should receive precedence, preference, or priority. 

12. Appellant asks this Court to give precedence to this appeal 

because the interests of justice require it. See Tex. R. App. P. 40.1(c). 

13. Since February 3, 2015, management of Pecan Point 

Brewing Co. has been displaced by a wrongful receivership and 

injunction. Brief of Appellant, William H. Scurlock v. John M. 

Hubbard, No. 14C-1653-102, appeal docketed, 06-15-00014-CV (March 

19, 2015). Each day that this matter remains outstanding constitutes 
5 

an additional infringement on Appellant, William H. Scurlock’s, right to 

own, operate, and manage Pecan Point Brewing Co. 

14. Accordingly, Appellant asks this Court to give precedence to 

this appeal and require Appellee to timely file his brief in order to allow 

the Court to render an opinion and judgment at the earliest practicable 

time. 

PRAYER 

 For reasons stated above, Appellant requests that this Court deny 

Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time to File Brief, or in the alternative, 

limit any extension granted to no more than seven (7) days, deny 

Appellee’s Motion to Abate, and grant Appellant’s Motion to Give 

Appeal Precedence. 

 
6 

 Respectfully submitted: 

 /s/ Cammy Kennedy 

 Texas Bar No. 24079245 

cammy@nortonandwood.com

 

 Cory J. Floyd 

Texas Bar No. 24049365 

cory@nortonandwood.com

 

 NORTON & WOOD, L.L.P. 

 315 Main Street 

 Texarkana, Texas 75501 

 Phone: (903) 823-1321 

 FAX: (903) 823-1325 

 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT, 

 WILLIAM H. SCURLOCK 

 
7 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I HEREBY CERTIFY that on April 10, 2015, a true and correct 

copy of Appellant’s Response to Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time to 

File Brief, or Alternatively, Motion to Abate, and Appellant’s Motion to 

Give Appeal Precedence was forwarded to the counsel below: 

 Brent M. Langdon 

 Kyle B. Davis 

 LANGDON & DAVIS 

 625 Sam Houston Drive, Suite A 

 New Boston, Texas 75570 

 Email: blangdon@ldatty.com

 Email: kdavis@ldatty.com

 

/s/ Cammy Kennedy 

 Cammy Kennedy