Dobie Whiteside and Olita Whiteside v. Paddock Homesowners Association Inc
Dobie Whiteside and Olita Whiteside v. Paddock Homesowners Association Inc
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON ORDER ON MOTION Appellate case name: Dobie Whiteside and Olita Whiteside v. Paddock Homeowners Association, Inc. Appellate case number: 01-16-00874-CV Trial court case number: 2015-03142 Trial court: 125th District Court of Harris County On November 1, 2016, appellants, Dobie Whiteside and Olita Whiteside, via counsel, Sharon Hemphill, after timely filing a motion for new trial, timely filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s order, signed on August 19, 2016, which made a June 3, 2016 partial summary judgment into a final judgment on September 19, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. 26.1(a)(1). On December 29, 2016, this Court dismissed as moot appellants’ counsel’s motion for an extension of time to file appellants’ brief because the records had yet to be filed. Although the court reporter filed an info sheet in this Court on January 3, 2017, stating that no reporter’s record was taken, the clerk’s record has yet to be filed.
On January 17, 2017, the pro se appellants filed a letter in this Court requesting to remove their attorney and for an extension of time to hire new counsel. However, in civil cases, a party is entitled to represent himself or to be represented by an attorney, but he is not entitled to representation partly by counsel and partly pro se. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 7 (“Any party to a suit may appear and prosecute or defend his rights therein, either in person or by attorney of the court.”). “Moreover, we have no obligation to accept or consider pleadings filed pro se by a party who is represented by counsel.” In re Watson, No. 07-08-0232-CV, 2008 WL 2583003, at *1 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, orig. proceeding) (citation omitted).
Accordingly, because the appellants have an attorney who has appeared in this Court, and they have no right to hybrid representation, the Court construes this letter as a motion, but DISMISSES AS MOOT their motion to remove their attorney and for an extension of time to hire new counsel.
It is so ORDERED.
Judge’s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes Acting individually Date: January 24, 2017
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.