1

NO. 04-13-00888-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT SAN ANTONIO

SPECIALTY SELECT CARE CENTER OF SAN ANTONIO, LLC D/B/A

CASA RIO HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION,

Appellant,

v.

JOSE FLORES, AS NEXT FRIEND OF JULIE FLORES,

Appellee.

On Appeal from the 131st Judicial District Court, 

Bexar County, Texas, Cause No. 2013-CI-04577

APPELLANT’S MOTION TO LIFT 

ABATEMENT AND REINSTATE APPEAL

Breck Harrison – 24007325

bharrison@jw.com

Jorge A. Padilla – 24054512

jpadilla@jw.com

JACKSON WALKER L.L.P.

100 Congress Avenue, Suite 1100

Austin, Texas 78701

512-236-2000

512-236-2002 (Facsimile)

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT 

SPECIALTY SELECT CARE 

CENTER OF SAN ANTONIO LLC 

D/B/A CASA RIO HEALTHCARE 

AND REHABILITATION 

June 11, 2015

ACCEPTED

04-13-00888-CV

FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

6/11/2015 4:06:55 PM

KEITH HOTTLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 06/11/15 4:06:55 PM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk
2

TO THE HONORABLE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS:

Appellant Specialty Select Care Center of San Antonio LLC d/b/a Casa Rio 

Healthcare and Rehabilitation (“Appellant”) files this Motion to Lift Abatement 

and Reinstate Appeal and respectfully shows the following:

FACTS AND ARGUMENT

This is an interlocutory appeal of the trial court’s order denying Appellant’s 

Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.

CODE §51.016 (authorizing an interlocutory appeal from an order denying a motion 

to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act). 

Appellant filed its Appellant’s Brief on January 30, 2014. Appellee filed his 

Appellee’s Brief on February 18, 2014. On March 10, 2014, Appellant filed its 

Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief. 

On March 19, 2014, this Court entered an order that abated this case pending 

the Texas Supreme Court’s resolution of three cases previously decided by this 

Court: Williamsburg Care Co. L.P. v. Acosta, 406 S.W.3d 711 (Tex. App.—San 

Antonio 2013, pet. filed); Fredericksburg Care Co. L.P. v. Lira, 407 S.W.3d 810 

(Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed); and Fredericksburg Care Co. L.P. v. 

Perez, 406 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed) (collectively 

these three cases are referred to as “Acosta, Lira and Perez”). See March 19, 2014 

Order, attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” In granting Appellant’s Motion to Abate, 
3

this Court ordered that this case would “be treated as a closed case, unless and until 

appellant files a motion requesting its reinstatement following the Texas Supreme 

Court’s resolution of the issue.” Id. The Court’s March 19, 2014 order also denied 

Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief as moot. Id.

The Texas Supreme Court decided Acosta, Lira and Perez on March 6, 

2015. In those opinions, the Texas Supreme Court resolved the central issue in this 

case: whether Section 74.451 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code invalidated 

the parties’ arbitration agreement. 

Now that the Texas Supreme Court has resolved this issue, Appellant seeks 

to have this Court lift the abatement and reinstate the appeal. Furthermore,

Appellant seeks for the Court to reconsider its Motion for Extension of Time to 

File Reply Brief and set a deadline for Appellant to file its Reply to Appellee’s 

Brief.

PRAYER

Accordingly, Appellant Specialty Select Care Center of San Antonio LLC 

d/b/a Casa Rio Healthcare and Rehabilitation requests that this Court grant the 

Motion to Lift Abatement and Reinstate Appeal, to reconsider its Motion for 

Extension of Time to File Reply Brief, and to set a deadline for Appellant to file its 

Reply to Appellee’s Brief.
4

Respectfully submitted,

JACKSON WALKER L.L.P.

By: /s/ Jorge A. Padilla

Breck Harrison

State Bar No. 24007325

bharrison@jw.com

Jorge A. Padilla

State Bar No. 24054512

jpadilla@jw.com

100 Congress, Suite 1100

Austin, TX 78701

(512) 236-2000

(512) 236-2002 – Facsimile

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT 

SPECIALTY SELECT CARE 

CENTER OF SAN ANTONIO LLC 

D/B/A CASA RIO HEALTHCARE 

AND REHABILITATION
5

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I certify that I have conferred with Andrew J. Skemp by email and I have 

attempted in good faith to reach an agreement regarding the motion. Mr. Skemp

has not responded to an email to determine whether he is opposed to this Motion to 

Lift Abatement and Reinstate Appeal. However, Mr. Skemp has previously 

requested the undersigned to file a motion to reinstate the appeal.

/s/ Jorge A. Padilla

Jorge A. Padilla

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, on the 11th day of June 2015, a true and correct copy of 

the foregoing was served on all counsel of record listed below in accordance with 

Rule 9.5(c) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure via e-mail and certified 

mail, return receipt requested:

Beth S. Janicek

Andrew J. Skemp

Janicek Law Firm, PC

1100 NE Loop 410, Suite 550

San Antonio, Texas 78209

andrew@janiceklaw.com

beth@janiceklaw.com

/s/ Jorge A. Padilla

Jorge A. Padilla

13572383v.1
EXHIBIT “A”
§ourtb QCourt of ~ppeal% 

~an %lntonio, W:exas 

March 19,2014 

No. 04-13-00888-CV 

SPECIALTY SELECT CARE CENTER OF SAN ANTONIO LLC 

d/b/a Casa Rio Healthcare and Rehabilitation, 

Appellant 

v. 

Jose FLORES, as next friend of Julie Flores, 

Appellee 

From the l3lst Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas 

Trial Comt No. 2013-CI-04577 

Honorable Karen H. Pozza, Judge Presiding 

Sitting: Sandee Btyan Marion, Justice 

Marialyn Barnard, Justice 

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice 

ORDER 

FILE COPY 

Appellant has filed a motion to abate this appeal because one of the issues presented in 

the appeal is the same issue pending in petitions for review filed in Williamsburg Care Co. L.P. 

v. Acosta, 406 S.W.3d 711 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2013, pet. filed), Fredericksburg Care Co. 

L.P. v. Lira, 407 S.W.3d 810 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2013, pet. filed), and Fredericksburg 

Care Co. L.P. v. Perez, 406 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2013, pet. filed). This comt 

has considered the motion, the appellee's response, and the appellant's reply to the appellee's 

response. In light of the pending higher court review of the precedent previously established by 

this court, the comt has determined that abating this appeal pending the Texas Supreme Comt's 

resolution of the issue will likely achieve the greatest judicial efficiency. Accordingly, 

appellant's motion to abate is GRANTED. For administrative purposes, this appeal will be 

treated as a closed case, unless and until appellant files a motion requesting its reinstatement 

following the Texas Supreme Comi's resolution ofthe issue. 

Appellant's motion for extension oftime to file reply brief is DENIED AS MOOT. 

It is so ORDERED on March 19,2014. 

ATIRSTRDTO ~ qJw Keith E. Hottle 

Clerk of Court