1 ... S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 2 ... Jul i a i m pl i es— w i t hou t expl anat i on or r ef er ences t o t he r ecor d orl egal a u th o ri ty
— th a t th e d i v o rc e d e c re e w a s s o m e h o w i n e ffe c ti v e .



## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH
NO. 2 - 0 6 - 3 9 4 - CV
T HE E S T AT E OF J OHN AR OON S OOK M A, DE CE AS E D

----- ----- --

FR O M PROBATE CO URT NO . 1 OF TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- In t h is re s t r ic t e d a p p e a l, A p p e lla n tJ u li a A n n S o o k m a , p r o s e , a p p e a ls fro m a p ro b a te c o u rt o rd e r s tri k i n g h e r p l e a d i n g s . W e a ffir m . Back gr ound Jul i a m ar r i ed John Sook m a i n 198 5. O ne chi l d, K. S. , w as bor n t o t he
m a r r i a ge . J ul i a a nd J oh n di vo r c e d i n 1999. 23 ... J u l i a fi l e d h e r m o ti o n to tra n s fe r u n d e r p ro b a te c o d e s e c ti o n 5 (b ),

w hi ch m and at es — i n c ount i es w i t h no st at ut or y pr oba t e o rco unt y c ourt s— t he tra n s fe r o f c o n te s te d p ro b a te p ro c e e d i n g s fi l e d i n a c o n s ti tu ti o n a l c o u n tyc o u rt to a d i s tri c t c o u rt. S ee T EX . P R OB . C ODE A NN . § 5 ( b ) ( V e r n o n 2 0 0 3 ) . T h e t wo p ro b a te c o u rts o f T a rra n t C o u n tya re s ta tu to ryp ro b a te c o u rts . T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 25. 222 1( c) ( V er non 2004) . Thus , pro b a te c o d e s ec t i on 5( b) di d not appl y t o t he pr oceedi ngs. 2 J o h n d i e d i n tes tate i n M a rch 2 0 0 5 . H i s sister, L e sli e S o o k m a -R o rt v e d t, f i l e d a n a pp l i c a t i on f or l e t t e r s o fi nd e pe nd e nta dm i ni s t r a t i on i n Se pt e m be r2005 i n Pr obate C our tN um berTw o o fTar r antC oun t y. The app l i cat i on i denti f i ed K. S. as J o h n ’s s o l e he i r . Ju l i a— on he row n be hal fan d a s K. S. ’ s nex t f r i end

— f i l ed cha l l eng es t o L es l i e’ s app l i ca t i on. L es l i e t hen f i l ed a m ot i on f or sanct i ons und erci vi l pr act i ce and r em e d ie s c o d e chapt er10 , assert i ng t hat J u l i a ’s ch a l l e n g e s h a d n o b a sis i n l a w o r fac t a n d th a t J u l i a fi l e d th e m so l e l yto har ass, cr eat e unnecessar y del ay, and i ncr ease t he costofl i t i gat i on. Jul i a f i l ed
a m o ti o n to tran sfe r t h e p rob a te p roc e e d i n g to a d i stri c t co u rt . 3 T h e pr ob a t e c ou rti s s ue d l e t t e r s t e s t a m e nt a r y t o L e s l i e o n M a r c h 25 , 20 06 and si gned a j udg m entdecl ar i ng K . S . t o be John ’ s sol e hei r . O n t he sam e day , t he pr oba t e c ourts i gne d a n or deri m pos i ng s anc t i ons on J ul i a, ( 1) f i ndi ng t hats he had f i l ed herpl ea di ngs f or an i m pr ope r pur pos e a nd t hatt heyha d no bas i s i n l a w o rf a c t ; ( 2 ) s t r i k i n g h e rp l e a d i n g s ; ( 3 ) o r d e r i n g h e rn o tt o f i l e a ny m o r e p r o s e p le a d in g s w it h t h e c o u rt ; a n d (4 ) o r d e r in g h e rt o p a yt o L e s lie $ 2 ,4 0 0 i n a tto rn e y ’s fe e s a n d $ 8 5 i n c o s ts .4 ... F o r r e a s o n s n o t e x p la in e d in h e rb r ie f , J u lia c o n s is t e n t lyre f e r s t o t h is

or deras i m posi ng “nun c pr o t unc” sanct i ons. 3 D es pi t e t he cou rt ’ s or der , i n Apr i l 2006 , Jul i a f i l ed herpr o s e “ N ot i ce of F e l o n yC ri m i n a l M a i l F rau d b y [ L e sli e ], ” “ M o ti o n to R e v o k e [ L e sli e ’s] S u rety Bond f orFr aud u p o n t he C ourtan d Hei r s, ” “M ot i on t o SetA si de Exe m pt Pr oper t y, ” and “M ot i on t o S etA si de O r derf orSan ct i ons and Ju dgm ent . ” O n M ay 3, 200 6, t he pr oba t e cou rt j udge r ec us ed hi m se l fs ua sp ont e; t he
r ea so n f ort he r ec us al doe s notap pea ri n t he r ec or d. The pr es i di ng j udge oft he st at ut or y pr obate cour t s t r ansf er r ed t he pr oceedi ngs t o Pr obate C our tN um ber O n e o f T a rra n t C o u n ty . I n Jun e 20 06 , Pr obate C our tN um berO ne schedul ed a st at us conf er ence f orJul y 5, 200 6 , a n d i n s t r uct ed Jul i a t o a ppe ari n pe r so n i fs he had not
r et ai ned an at t or ney . W hen Jul i a f ai l ed t o a ppe arf ort he st at us co nf er enc e, t he pr obate cour tent er ed an “O r derI m posi ng S anct i ons S ua Spon te, ” st r i ki ng t he pl e a di ng s J ul i a f i l e d a fter P r ob a t e Cou rtNum be rTw o’ s M a r c h 25, 2006 sanct i ons or deras a sanct i on f or“t he f ai l ur e t o appearorgiv e n o tic e o fan i nt end ed f ai l ur e t o app ea r at t he St at us C onf er enc e a nd f orvi ol at i on ofpr evi ous o rd e rs o f th e c o u rt.” 45 ... The r ec or d con t ai ns no or der s dat ed A pr i l 28 orJun e 8, 2006 . The

M ay 3, 20 06 o rd e ri s t he or derby w hi ch t he j udg e ofPr obate C our tN um ber T w o re c u s e d h i m s e l f, a n d th e M a y1 5 a n d 1 8 , 2 0 0 6 o r d e r s a re th e o rd e rs a s s i gn i ng a nd t r a ns f e r r i ng t he c a s e t o Pr ob a t e Cou rtNum be rOne . On M a y 25, 2006, t he pr ob a t e c ou rt s i gn e d a n or de r i nc r e a s i ng L e s l i e ’ s b on d t o $252, 000. O n J u n e 6 , 2 0 0 6 , t h e p r o b a te c o u rtsi g n e d a te m p o raryres tr a i n i n g o rde r t o pr eve nta m o rtg a g e co m pan y f r om f or ec l os i ng on w hatha d be en John an d Jul i a’ s m ar i t al hom e. O n Jun e 27 , t he pr obate cour tappoi nt ed an at t or ney ad l i te m to re p re s e n t th e i n te re s ts o f K .S . 4 Jul i a f i l ed a n ot i ce ofr es t r i ct ed app ea l on Oct obe r26, 2006 , ap pea l i ng f r om t he Jul y 5 o r derand t he “Fi nal O rd e rs si gned A pr i l 28 t h, M ay 3rd, M ay 1 5 th , M a y1 8 th , M a y2 5 th , J u n e 6 th , J u n e 8 th , [a n d ] J u n e 2 7 .” 5 D i sc us si on 1. R est r i ct ed A ppeal To pr evai l i n a r est r i ct ed appeal , an appel l antm ustshow t hat( 1) a not i ce ofap pea l w as f i l ed w i t hi n si x m ont hs of t he dat e t he com pl ai ned
- ofj udgm ent
oror derw as s i gne d; ( 2) ap pel l an t w a s a part y t o t he su i tw ho di d not part i ci pat e i n t he hea r i ng t hatr esu l t ed i n t he j udgm entoror der ; ( 3) ap pel l ant di d nott i m el y f i l e a pos t -j udgm entm ot i on, r equ es tf i ndi ngs off ac tan d concl usi ons ofl aw , orf i l e a n o tice ofappeal w i t hi n t he t i m e per m i t t ed und er r ul e 26. 1( a) ; an d ( 4) t he com pl ai ned
- ofer r ori s app ar entf r om t he f ac e o ft he
r ec or d. T EX . R. A PP . P. 3 0 ; A lexa nder v. Lynda ’

s Bouti que , 134 S. W . 3d 845, 8 4 8 (T e x . 2 0 0 4 ); see T EX . R. A PP . P . 2 6 .1 (c ). 2 . P r o b a t e C o u rtN u m b e rO n e ’s J u r is d ic t io n t o S a n c t io n J u lia6 ... J u lia a r g u e s a ll o fh e ris s u e s t o g e t h e rin o n e d is c u s s io n . Itis d if f ic u lt

ori m po ssi bl e t o det er m i ne w hi ch por t i ons oft he ar gum entper t ai n t o w hi ch i ss ues , i fan y. The ar gum ental so r ef er enc es f ac t s and doc um ent s t hatdo n ot a p p e a r i n th e re c o rd . 5 I n he rf i r sti ss ue, J u l i a a rgue s t hat“ Pr oba t e CourtN o. 1 w as w i t hout j u ri sd i c ti o n to C o n tes tan t’ s [si c ] stri k e p l e a d i n g s b a se d o n v o i d F i n a l J u d g m e n ts and O r der s f r om Pr oba t e C ourtN o. 2 . . . an d a bus ed i t s aut hor i t y i n gr ant i ng e x c e s s i v e ‘n u n c p ro tu n c ’ sa n c ti o n s .” W e w i l l co n side r t h e thre e co m p o n e n ts 6 ofheri ssue— t hatPr obate C o ur tN um berO ne l acked j ur i sdi ct i on t o i m pose sa nct i ons , t hatPr oba t e CourtN um ber Tw o’ s i ni t i al sa nct i ons or derw as voi d, and t hatPr oba t e CourtN um ber O ne abu se d i t s di sc r et i on byi m pos i ng e xce ss i ve sa nct i ons — ea ch i n t ur n. Fi r st , Jul i a of f er s no ar gum ent , anal ysi s, orexpl anat i on t o suppo rther
c o n te n ti o n th a t P ro b a te C o u rt N u m b e r O n e l a c k e d j u ri s d i c ti o n to s a n c ti o n h e r. W hen a part y f ai l s t o s upportan i ss ue w i t h ar gum ent , sh e w ai ves anyer r oron a p p e a l . Happ y Har

bor Methodi

st Hom e, I

nc. v. Cowi

ns , 903 S. W . 2d 884, 886 ( Tex. A pp. — H ous t on [ 1stD i st . ] 1995 , no w r i t ) . M or eov er , a l ac k o fj ur i sd i ct i on i s notap par entf r om t h e re c o rd ; Jul i a a ppe ar ed and pa rt i ci pat ed i n t he p ro c e e d i n g s i n P ro b a te C o u rt N u m b e r T w o , a n d th e p ro c e e d i n g s w e re t r ans f er r ed t o Pr oba t e CourtN um berO ne by or der of t he pr es i di ng j udge oft he
s ta tu to ryp ro b a te c o u rts i n a c c o rd a n c e w i th th e ru l e s o f c i v i l p ro c e d u re . S ee7 ... Jul i a cannot ot her w i se chal l enge t he M ar ch 2 5, 20 06 sanct i ons or der

b yre s t r ic t e d a p p e a l b e c a u s e s h e f ile d h e rn o t ic e o fa p p e a l m o r e t h a n s ix m o n th s l a te r. S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 30 . Th er ef or e, she cannot chal l enge t he t r i al cour t ’ s f i ndi ngs t hat her pl eadi ngs had no l egal orf act ual basi s and w er e f i l ed f ori m pr operpur poses. 6 T EX . R. A PP . P . 3 0 ; T EX . R. C IV . P. 18 . Ther ef or e, w e over r ul e t hi s partofher f i r sti ssue. Ju l i a n e xt a rgu e s t ha tPr ob a t e Cou rtNum be rTw o’ s M a r c h 25, 2006
s a n c t i o n s o r d e rwa s v o i d b e c a u s e t h e j u d g e wa s d i s q u a l i f i e d u n de ra rt i c l e V,
se ct i on 11 of t he Texa s con st i t ut i on, w hi ch pr ohi bi t s a j udge f r om s i t t i ng i n a ca se i n w hi ch t he j udge i s i nt er es t ed, w her e t he part i es ar e c onne ct ed t o t he j udge by af f i ni t y orco ns ang ui ni t y, or w hen t he j udge has be en cou ns el i n t he
case. S ee T EX . C ONST . art . V , § 11. The r ec or d sh ow s onl y t hatt he j udge of

7 P r o b a t e C o u rtN u m b e rT w o re c u s e d h im s e lfu n d e rru le o fp r o c e d u r e 1 8 b ; it does not show w hy he r ecused hi m sel f , and nothi ng i n t he r ecor d suggest s t hat th e rea so n w a s o ne o ft he r e l a t i on s hi ps i de nt i f i e d bya rt i c l e V, s e c t i on 11 . B e c a u s e e rro r i s n o t a p p a re n t fro m th e fa c e o f th e re c o rd , w e o v e rru l e th i s p a rt ofJul i a’ s f i r sti ssue. Fi nal l y, Jul i a ar gue s t hat Pr oba t e CourtN um berO ne abu se d i t s di sc r et i on by i m pos i ng s a n c ti o n s w hen s he f ai l ed t o a ppe arf ort he Jul y 5 s t at us c o n f e r e n c e b e c a u s e s h e h a d n o n o t ic e t h a th e rf a ilu r e t o a p p e a rw o u ld re s u lt i n s a n c ti o n s . S eeMurph reev. Zi eg el m a ir, 937 S . W . 2d 493, 495 ( Tex.7

A p p .— H o u sto n [ 1 s t D i st.] 1 9 9 5 , n o w ri t) ( h o l d i n g tr i a l co u rtab u se d i ts di sc r et i on by st r i ki ng part y’ s pl ea di ng and gr ant i ng def aul t j udgm entas s anc t i on fo r f a i l i n g to a p p e a r a t p retri a l h e a ri n g w h e n p a rt y h a d n o n o ti c e th a t f a i l u re to
a p p e a r w o u l d re s u l t i n s a n c ti o n s ). Butt he or deral so re c i tes as gr ounds f ors t r i ki ng he rpl ea di ngs t he
s a n c t io n s o r d e rim p o s e d b yP r o b a t e C o u rtN u m b e rT w o , w h ic h p r o h ib it e d J u lia f r om f i l i ng a ddi t i ona l pr o s e p l ea di ngs . Ju l i a d o e s notch al l eng e t hi s se con d b a s is f o rt h e s a n c t io n s o r d e r . G e n e r a lly , a n a p p e lla n tm u s ta t t a c ka ll i nde pen den tba se s orgr ounds th atf ul l y s upporta com pl ai ned
- ofr ul i ng or j u d g m e n t. W

a l l i ngv. Me tca lfe , 8 6 3 S .W .2 d 5 6 , 5 8 (T e x . 1 9 9 3 ); Hong Kong D ev. , I nc. v. N

guyen , 2 2 9 S .W .3 d 4 1 5 , 4 5 6 (T e x . A p p .— H o u s to n [1 s t D i s t.] 200 7, no p et . ) ( op. on r eh’ g) . T h i s ru l e ex i st s bec aus e i fan i nde pen den t gr ound ful l y s upport s t he com pl ai ned
- ofr ul i ng orj udgm ent , butt he app el l ant
as si gns no er r or t o t hat i nde pen den t gr ound, t hen ( 1) w e m us t a c c e p t the val i di t y oft hat unc hal l eng ed i nde pen den t gr ound and t hus ( 2) an y e r r ori n t he gr oun ds chal l enged on appeal i s har m l ess because t he unch al l enged i n d e p e n d e n t g ro u n d fu l l ys u p p o rts th e c o m p l a i n e d -o f ru l i n g o r j u d g m e n t. W al l i ng , 8 6 3 S .W .2 d a t 5 8 ; HongKongD ev. , I nc. , 229 S. W . 3d a t456. T h e i n d e p e n d e n t g ro u n d fo r s a n c ti o n s c i te d b y th e p ro b a te c o u rt— J u l i a ’s f ai l ur e t o abi de by t he pr i orsanct i ons or der— fu ll y s upp or t s t he cour t ’ s or der
s tri k i n g h e r p l e a d i n g s . In h e re n t i n a c o u rt’s a b i l i ty to i s s u e o rd e rs i s a c o u rt’s8

a u th o ri ty to e n fo rc e th o s e o rd e rs . Ham i lton v. Mor

r i s Res . , Ltd. , 225 S. W . 3d 336 , 346 ( Tex. A pp. — San Ant oni o 2007, pe t . de n i ed) . A t r i al co urtha s t he pow ert o s t r i ke pl ea di ngs an d r end era d e fa u l t j udgm entas a sa nct i on f or
v i o l a ti o n o f a p re tri a l o rd e r. Ko slo w ’sv. Ma ckie , 796 S . W . 2d 700, 704 ( Tex. 199 0) ( hol di ng t r i al cou rt di d not abu se i t s di sc r et i on by st r i ki ng pl ea di ngs an d
r end er i ng de f aul tj udgm entas s anc t i on f orvi ol at i on of p re tri a l or deran d col l ec t i ng s i m i l ar ca se s) . Bec aus e J ul i a d oes notch al l eng e t he port i on oft he
o rd e r s t r i k i n g h e r p l e a d i n g s fo r fa i l i n g to c o m p l yw i th th e p ri o r o rd e r, w e over r ul e t he r em ai nderofherf i r sti ssue. Jul i a’ s f our t h i ssue i s “[ w ] het herA ppel l ant ’ s due pr ocess and due cou r se of l a w r i g h t s t o h a v e a j u r y d e c i d e s u p e r i o r r i g h t t o a p p o i n t ment of adm i ni st r at or . ” Es se nt i al l y, Jul i a c om pl ai ns t hatt he t r i al co urter r ed by f ai l i ng t o gr anthera j ur y t r i al on t he contes t ed i ssue ofLesl i e’ s ap p oi nt m entas a d m i n i s tra to r a fte r J u l i a p a i d th e j u ryfe e a n d re q u e s te d a j u ry . S ee T EX . P R OB . C ODE A NN . § 2 1 (V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ) (“In a l l c o n te s te d p ro b a te . . . p ro c e e d i n g s . . . t he par t i es shal l be ent i t l ed t o t r i al by j ur y as i n ot herci vi l act io n s .” ). A s w e n o t e d a b o v e , a t r ia l c o u rtm a ys t r ik e p l e a d i n g s a n d re n d e ra d e f a u lt j udg m ent
— t hatis , a j udg m entw i t hou ta j ur y t r i al

— ati t s di scr et i on as a s a n c ti o n fo r v i o l a ti o n o f a p r e t r i a l o rd e r. S e eKo slo w ’s , 796 S. W . 2d a t704. B e c a u s e th e p ro b a te c o u rt d i d n o t a b u s e i ts d i s c re ti o n b ys tri k i n g J u l i a ’s9

p l e a d i n g s, i n c l u d i n g h e r j u ry req u e st, w e h o l d tha t i t did n o t err b yfai l i n g to subm i tt o a j ur y t he i ssues contes t ed by Jul i a, and w e over r ul e herf our t h i ssue.

3. Jul i a’ s Rem ai ni ng I ssues J u l i a ’s se c o n d i ss u e i s “ [w ]he th e r t h e p rob a te c o u rtab u se d i ts
con st i t ut i ona l dut y t o s i gn t he O r derap pr ovi ng ordi sap p ro v i n g I nve nt or y, A ppr ai se m entan d L i stofCl ai m s pr i ort o a l l o w i n g a di sq ual i f i ed adm i ni st r at or
w i t h bog us s ur et y bo nds to i l l ega l l y w i t hhol d e xem ptf unds . ” The a r gum ent
se ct i on ofhe rbr i efco nt ai ns t he hea di ng “ I nve nt or y, A ppr ai se m ent& Cl ai m s of E s ta te . N o J u d i c i a l A d m i s s i o n b y C o n s e n t o f C o n te n ts ” a n d

— tw o p a g e s l a te r, a ft e r a l engthy hor nbo ok di scussi on of t he duti es ofat t or neys ad l i t em — a su m m ar y ofa si ngl e o f f
- poi ntca se an d t he se nt enc e “ D o not c o n s e n tt o or appr ove an i nventor y w hi ch desi gn a te s a decedent’ s pr oper t y i n a m anner contr ar y t o t he cl i ent ’ s besti nt er est . ” H ert hi r d i ssue i s “[ w ] het hert he t r i al co urtab us ed i t s di sc r et i on a nd st at ut or y du t y t o O r der § 271 hom es t ea d and exe m pt pr ope rt y t o be s et - a- si de
orherguar di an evi dence w as l egal l y suf f i ci ent i n l i ght of t he var i ance bet w een t he A ppe l l a n t ’ s i nj ur y de f ens e r am i f i ed f r om a m aj orau t om obi l e a cc i den tan d
m e d ic a l re s t r ic t e d .” T h e a r g u m e n tp o rt io n o fh e rb r ie fd o e s n o td is c u s s t h is is s u e a ta ll.10

A n i ssue on appeal unsupp or t ed by ar gum ent orci t at i on t o any l egal
a u th o ri ty p re s e n ts n o th i n g fo r th e c o u rt to re v i e w . Strang e v. Cont ’ l Cas. Co. , 1 2 6 S .W .3 d 6 7 6 , 6 7 8 (T e x . A p p .— D a l l a s 2 0 0 4 , p e t. d e n i e d ), cert. denied, 543 U . S. 1076 ( 200 5) . Furt her , “w e kno w of no aut hor i t y obl i gat i ng us t o be com e adv oca t es f o r a p a rt i cul arl i t i gan tt hr ough per f or m i ng t hei rr es ea r ch and d evel opi ng t hei rar gum entf ort hem . ” Tel lo v. BankO ne , N. A. , 2 1 8 S . W . 3d 10 9, 11 6 ( Tex . A pp. — H oust on [ 14 t h D i st . ] 20 07 , no p e t. ). Th us, an i n a d e q u a te l yb ri e fe d p o i n t m a yb e w a i v e d o n a p p e a l . Ha l l v. S tep h en s o n, 919 S. W . 2d 454 , 467 ( Tex. A pp. — Fort W ort h 199 6, w r i tde ni ed) ; s e ea ls o F re do n ia State Bankv. G en. A m . Li f e I ns . Co. , 881 S. W . 2d 279, 284–8 5 ( Te x. 1994 ) (di sc u ss i n g “l o n g -stan d in g rul e ” th a t po i n t m a yb e w a i v e d d u e to i n a d e q u a te b ri e fi n g ). W e h o l d tha t Ju l i a w a i v e d h e r se c o n d an d thir d i ss u e s b yfai l i n g to adequ at el y br i eft hem , and w e t her ef or e over r ul e t hem . C onc l us i on H avi ng ov er r ul ed al l ofJul i a’ s i ssues, w e af f i r m t he t r i al cour t s’ or der s. P E R CU R I AM PA N EL M : G A RD N ER, W A LKER, an d M C C O Y, JJ. DEL I VERE D: J ul y 3, 2008