Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
From
the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial
Court No. 2014-CI-02528 Honorable Stephani A. Walsh, Judge
Presiding
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Beth Watkins, Justice
Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
MEMORANDUM OPINION
REBECA
C. MARTINEZ, JUSTICE
Allision
Tracy White challenges the trial court's order dismissing
her petition for bill of review based on failure to
prosecute. White contends: (1) the trial court lacked
jurisdiction to enter its dismissal order, (2) the trial
court failed to give sufficient notice of its intent to
dismiss, (3) the trial court erred in denying reinstatement
of White's case without holding a hearing, and (4) the
trial court erred in denying White a hearing on her motion
for reconsideration and motion to vacate. White's second
issue is dispositive.[1] We hold notice of dismissal was
insufficient, and we reverse the trial court's dismissal
order and remand with instructions to reinstate White's
petition.
BACKGROUND
As a
bill-of-review appeal, this appeal concerns two trial-court
cause numbers: (1) the cause number assigned to the original
case that resulted in a final judgment; and (2) the cause
number assigned to the petition for bill of review, which
seeks to set aside the judgment in the original case.
In
March 2013, Appellee Jason Walsh filed an original divorce
proceeding under Cause No. 2013-CI-04825 (the "2013
Cause"). In August 2013, the trial court entered a final
divorce decree in that proceeding. In February 2014,
Appellant Allison Tracy White filed a petition for bill of
review under Cause No. 2014-CI-02528 (the "2014
Cause"). In her petition, White requested the court set
aside the final divorce decree entered in the 2013 Cause.
In July
2014, the trial court held a hearing on the bill of review.
There is no reporter's record from the hearing, and the
trial court never entered a formal order. The judge's
notes from the hearing state, "Bill of
Review-granted," and "Trial 8/27/14
9am."[2]
From
this point, the parties confusingly filed documents in both
the 2013 Cause and 2014 Cause, and the trial court held
hearings in both causes. On August 27, 2014, the trial court
held a hearing in the 2014 Cause at which the parties
announced "not ready" for trial. In September 2014,
White filed a motion for a continuance of the trial setting
to conduct discovery in the 2014 Cause. In March 2016, White
filed a motion to compel discovery, and, in August 2016, the
trial court entered an agreed order on the motion to compel.
The trial court also entered temporary orders in the 2014
Cause.
We do
not have a complete record from the 2013 Cause because the
present appeal is an appeal from the 2014
Cause.[3] White filed a jury demand in the 2013
Cause in July 2016, and the 2013 Cause was subsequently set
for trial at least six times.
In May
2018, the trial court set the 2014 Cause for a hearing on
July 10, 2018, on the dismissal docket. On June 7, 2018,
Walsh filed a "Motion to Strike Jury Demand and to
Dismiss" in the 2013 Cause. By his motion, Walsh sought
to strike White's jury demand and sought
"dismiss[al] of this case."
The
trial court held a hearing on Walsh's motion on June 19,
2018. The trial court granted Walsh's motion at the
hearing and directed the parties to prepare an order to be
filed in both cause numbers. The trial court stated:
"I'm going to enter the order in the 2013 [Cause]
that grants the dismissal of the Bill of Review in the 2014
[Cause]." According to the trial court, the effect of
these orders in the two proceedings would be to dismiss the
2014 Cause and to leave the 2013 divorce decree effective and
final. According to the trial court, the order to be entered
in the 2013 Cause would moot all filings in the 2013 Cause
filed after the divorce decree was entered. The trial court
thereafter signed orders in both causes granting Walsh's
motion and ordering that the final divorce decree in the 2013
Cause "shall remain in full force and effect."
White
then filed a motion-and later amended motions-to reinstate
the 2014 Cause. The parties dispute whether White properly
requested hearings on her motions, but it is undisputed the
trial court did not hold any hearings on White's ...