Larry Furrow and Keller 

Williams Legacy s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 19, 2015

No. 04-15-00074-CV

Stacey SCOTT,

Appellant

v.

Larry FURROW and Keller Williams Legacy Group,

Appellees

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13-1125-CV

Honorable W.C. Kirkendall, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The clerk’s record of trial court cause number (13-1125-CV) has been filed and reflects 

that Appellant Stacey Scott, who is pro se, sued Keller Williams Legacy Group, Larry Furrow, 

Juanita Denn, D.R. Barr, Patrick Denn, Robert Ritter, and Carol Matthews. Evidently, Larry 

Furrow and Keller Williams Legacy then moved for summary judgment. While this motion is 

not contained in the clerk’s record, the clerk’s record does contain an order by the trial court, 

signed on November 13, 2014, granting their motion for summary judgment and severing “all 

causes of action brought by [Scott] against Larry Furrow and/or Keller Williams Legacy Group.” 

On December 12, 2014, Scott filed a motion for new trial as to Keller Williams Legacy 

Group and Larry Furrow’s summary judgment, arguing that the trial court should “set aside the 

Judgment rendered against her on November 13, 2014, and grant her a new trial in this matter.” 

Scott did not file this motion in the severed cause (13-1125-CV-A), but filed it in the original 

cause number (13-1125-CV). On February 11, 2015, Scott then filed a notice of appeal in the 

original cause number (13-1125-CV), stating that she would like to appeal from the judgment 

signed November 13, 2014 (i.e. the judgment that severed her claims against in Keller Williams 

Legacy Group and Larry Furrow), and “a subsequent adverse interlocutory ruling that merged 

into the judgment by reference.” It is unclear from the clerk’s record what subsequent adverse 

interlocutory ruling to which Scott is referring. A letter filed in this court by Keller Williams 

Legacy Group and Larry Furrow clears up this reference. The letter argues that Scott’s notice of 

appeal is ineffective to perfect an appeal. Attached to the letter is a Final Judgment from the 

severed cause of action, 13-1125-CV-A, which incorporates the earlier granted summary 
judgment in favor of Keller Williams Legacy Group and Larry Furrow and awards them over 

$70,000 on their counter-claims against Scott for reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees. 

We first note that we have jurisdiction over Scott’s appeal. See In re J.M., 396 S.W.3d 

528, 530 (Tex. 2013) (“[T]his Court has consistently held that a timely filed document, even if 

defective, invokes the court of appeals’ jurisdiction.”). Although the notice of appeal filed on

February 11, 2015 was prematurely filed and filed in the original cause number instead of the 

severed cause number, it was sufficient to confer jurisdiction. The Texas Supreme Court has

emphasized that appellate courts should always “treat[] minor procedural mishaps with leniency, 

preserving the right to appeal” and “should not dismiss an appeal for a procedural defect 

whenever any arguable interpretation of the Rules of Appellate Procedure would preserve the 

appeal.” Ryland Enter., Inc. v. Weatherspoon, 355 S.W.3d 664, 665 (Tex. 2011) (quoting 

Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 616 (Tex. 1997)). Thus, the supreme court has held that 

prematurely filed notices of appeal are deemed timely filed on the date the judgment or order is 

signed. In re J.M., 396 S.W.3d at 530. Further, if, as in this case, the notice of appeal has the 

wrong cause number (the original cause number instead of a severed cause number), the 

appellant may amend the notice of appeal to correct the error. See Blankenship v. Robins, 878 

S.W.2d 138, 138-39 (Tex. 1994); City of San Antonio v. Rodriguez, 828 S.W.2d 417, 418 (Tex. 

1992).

It is clear from Scott’s notice of appeal that she intends to appeal from the summary 

judgment granted in favor of Keller Williams Legacy Group and Larry Furrow. See In re J.M., 

396 S.W.3d at 530 (explaining that be primary factor determining whether jurisdiction has been 

conferred on the appellate court is whether the notice of appeal was a bona fide attempt to invoke 

the appellate court’s jurisdiction). Scott’s notice of appeal also mentions a subsequent ruling, 

which is the award of attorney’s fees in favor of Keller Williams Legacy Group and Larry 

Furrow. However, her notice of appeal does not reflect the correct cause number or the date of 

the final judgment. We ORDER Scott to file an amended notice of appeal on or before March 

30, 2015. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(g). Her amended notice of appeal must (1) identify the trial 

court and state the case’s trial court number and style (i.e. the severed cause number relating to 

the appeal at issue and not the original cause number); (2) state the date of the judgment or order 

appealed from; (3) state that appellant desires to appeal; (4) state the court to which the appeal is 

taken; and (5) state the name of the party filing the notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(d). If 

appellant does not file the amended notice of appeal by the date ordered, this appeal will be 

dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), (c). 

While the clerk’s record from the original cause number has been filed; the clerk’s record 

from the severed cause number has not. We ORDER the trial court clerk to file on or before

April 8, 2015 a supplemental clerk’s record relating to trial court cause number 13-1125-CV-A. 

Further, the pleadings relating to Larry Furrow and Keller Williams Legacy Group’s motion for 

summary judgment are not contained within the clerk’s record already filed. Thus, the trial court 

clerk should file a supplemental clerk’s record that includes the motion for summary judgment, 

Scott’s response, and any other pleadings related to the summary judgment. 

_________________________________

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

court on this 19th day of March, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court