Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 8, 2015

No. 04-15-00551-CV

Richard Matthew VILLARREAL,

Appellant

v.

Rebecca L. VILLARREAL,

Appellee

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-CI-18202

Honorable Gloria Saldana, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On September 29, 2015, appellee’s counsel, Laura Winget-Hernandez, filed a “Motion 

for Withdrawal of Counsel.”1 In the motion, counsel asks this court for permission to withdraw 

from her appellate representation of appellee, Rebecca L. Villarreal. We DENY counsel’s 

motion because it does not comply with Rule 6.5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

Rule 6.5 states that an appellate may permit an attorney to withdraw from representing a 

party in the appellate court. TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5. However, any motion to withdraw must 

contain, among other things, a list of current deadlines and setting in the appellate court. Id. 

Counsel’s motion appears to have been written as if this case were still in the trial court phase, 

stating: “There is no pending setting or deadlines, including discovery deadlines, in this case. 

There is a standing Temporary Order in the record of this Court. No discovery requests have 

been served by either party in this case. There have not been any oral depositions in this case.” 

However, this matter is now on appeal, so deadlines in the trial court are irrelevant. Thus, 

counsel has not complied with subsection (a)(1) of Rule 6.5. See id. 

Additionally, Rule 6.5 requires that a motion to withdraw be delivered to the client in 

person or mailed — both by certified and first class mail — as the client’s last known address. 

Id. at R. 6.5(b). There was no certificate of service attached to counsel’s motion to withdraw. 

Accordingly, it does not appear the motion was properly served upon appellee or appellant. In 

 1 We recognize that counsel filed a motion to withdraw in the trial court, which the trial court granted. However, the 

motion was filed, and the trial court’s order was signed, after the trial court’s plenary power expired. Accordingly, 

the trial court’s order granting the motion was void. 
other words, it does not appear counsel served the motion in accordance with subsection (b) of 

Rule 6.5 or the general rule regarding service. 

Based on the foregoing, we DENY counsel’s motion to withdraw. Counsel is advised 

that she is still counsel for appellee at this time. Moreover, the court is concerned regarding 

counsel’s attempt to provide this court with current contact information for appellee. The 

address provided by counsel for appellee — 1977 Melanie Lane, Fairbanks, AK 99709 — is 

different than an address provided for appellee by counsel for appellant — 661 A Broadway St., 

Eielson AF Base, AK 99702. In the event counsel decides to file another motion to withdraw, 

one that is compliant with Rule 6.5, we ORDER that she clear up the discrepancy and provide 

this court with accurate contact for appellee, including a telephone number. 

We order the clerk of this court to serve a copy of this order on counsel for appellant, 

appellee — at both addresses stated above, Ms. Laura Winget-Hernandez, and the trial court. 

_________________________________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 8th day of October, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court