ACCEPTED

03-13-00336-CV

5225335

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

5/11/2015 10:21:48 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

477601.1 

80592.00013 

CASE NO. 03-13-00336-CV 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT 

AUSTIN, TEXAS 

R.D. TIPS, INC., 

Appellant 

v. 

VIRGINIA JETT, 

Appellee 

Appeal from the 419th District Court, Travis County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. D-1-GN-11-003799 

Hon. Rhonda Hurley, Judge Presiding 

APPELLANT'S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE'S 

MOTION TO EXPEDITE THE MANDATE 

1 

Jonathan D. Pauerstein 

State Bar No. 15637500 

ROSENTHAL P AUERSTEIN 

SANDOLOSKI AGATHER LLP 

755 E. Mulberry, Suite 200 

San Antonio, Texas 78212 

Telephone: (210) 225-5000 

Facsimile: (210) 354-4034 

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT, 

R.D. TIPS, INC. 

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 5/11/2015 10:21:48 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
To The Honorable Third Court of Appeals: 

Appellant, R.D. Tips, Inc., in opposition to Appellee's Motion To Expedite 

The Mandate, states the following: 

1. Appellant has superseded the judgment below as permitted by law. 

Accordingly, while this case is on appeal, Appellee has received the protection 

afforded by law and Appellant is entitled to pursue the appellate process to its 

conclusion. Nonetheless, Appellee seeks to expedite the issuance of the mandate 

based on conclusory allegations that she needs funds due to unspecified financial 

hardship. 

2. Appellant has until June 12th to file a petition for review in the 

Supreme Court of Texas, which it is entitled to file under Texas law. 

3. The mandate can only be expedited upon a showing of good cause. 

Tex. R. App. P. 18.1(c). 1 Appellee, failing to carry this burden, points to nothing 

that is not true of many plaintiffs who hold money judgments that are on appeal. 

While she has been unable to execute upon the superseded judgment, that is always 

so when a defendant appeals an adverse money judgment and posts a supersedeas 

bond to secure the plaintiff during the appellate process. And, while Appellee says 

Appellee's motion is unverified and not supported by affidavit, which alone warrants its 

denial. Cf Andrews v. Twin Montana, Inc., 547 S.W.2d 54, 56 (Tex. Civ. App.-Fort Worth 

1977, no writ) ("the motion of appellant for extension of time for filing his brief is not verified 

and ... there is no affidavit presented in support of it. Under these circumstances appellant has 

not proved anything by his motion; he has merely made some unsupported allegations."). 

477601.1 

80592.00013 

2 
she needs the money awarded in the judgment, that too is likely to be so in similar 

situations. 

4. Were Appellee's conclusory claims sufficient to show good cause for 

expediting the mandate and denying Appellant the right to supersede the judgment 

until the appellate process is exhausted, then good cause for the same relief would 

exist in most cases in which defendants appeal from money judgments. The good 

cause standard demands more, but Appellee has not provided it. 

5. Appellee has not alleged, let alone proven, facts demonstrating that 

there IS good cause for expediting the issuance of the mandate and thereby 

abrogating Appellant's right to pursue all appellate avenues for review of the 

superseded judgment. Appellee thus has not sustained her burden to establish good 

cause. 

For the foregoing reasons, Appellee's motion should be denied. 

477601.1 

80592.00013 

Respectfully submitted, 

J o athan D. Pauerstein 

State Bar No. 15637500 

ROSENTHAL P AUERSTEIN 

SANDOLOSKI A GATHER LLP 

755 E. Mulberry, Suite 200 

San Antonio, Texas 78212 

Telephone: (21 0) 225-5000 

Facsimile: (21 0) 354-4034 

jpauerstein@rpsalaw .com 

3 
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT, 

R.D. TIPS, INC. 

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 

The undersigned counsel certifies that this document contains 63 8 words 

(counting all parts of the document). The body text is in 14 point font, and the 

footnote text is in 12 point font. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned counsel hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing Appellant's Response To Motion To Expedite The Mandate was served 

via United States Mail on this 11th day of May, 2015, upon the following counsel 

of record: 

477601.1 

80592.00013 

Eric J. Taube 

Taube Summers Harrison Taylor 

Meinzer Brown LLP 

100 Congress A venue, 18th Floor 

Austin, Texas 78701 

4