Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:The appellant, Patricia Daniels, sued University of Texas Health Science Center for injuries she received when a UTHC employee pushed a large metal cart into her. A jury found that UTHC negligently caused Daniels’s injuries, awarded her $12,000 in past medical expenses, and denied her claims for pain and suffering, mental anguish and physical impairment. The trial court entered judgment on the jury’s verdict. Daniels timely filed her notice of appeal, which, as amended, states that her issues on appeal relate to damages. On July 8, 2004, Daniels filed her appellate brief. On the same date, she filed a motion for leave to supplement the reporter’s record. In her motion, Daniels alleged that, as counsel prepared the brief in this appeal, “it was determined that the Court would benefit by reading the medical exhibits at trial which provided objective medical evidence of pain and suffering. Mrs. Daniels did not request the Reporter’s Record because it is expensive and consists largely of liability testimony and subjective assessments of injuries.” In this court’s order overruling the motion, the court acknowledged that Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(d) permits supplementation of the reporter’s record and that Rule 34.6(b)(3) prohibits an appellate court from refusing to file a supplemental reporter’s record for failure to timely request it. The court stated that these rules apply only where a reporter’s record has been filed with the appellate court. Because Daniels had not filed a reporter’s record, the court concluded she was not entitled to file a supplemental reporter’s record. The court issued this order to further explain the ruling. HOLDING:The motion for reconsideration is denied. Daniels argues that: “Rule 34.6 allows Mrs. Daniels . . . to conduct her research, write her brief, determine what portions of the expensive record are actually necessary for effective presentation, and then request and file the excerpts from the reporter’s record which are actually necessary.” Rule 34.6(d) provides a means for assuring that all relevant material is included in the reporter’s record filed with an appellate court. The rule provides that “[i]f anything relevant is omitted from the reporter’s record, . . . any party may. . . file in the appellate court a supplemental reporter’s record containing the omitted items.” To “omit” is “to fail to include” or to “leave out.” “The American Heritage Dictionary” 867 (William Morris ed., 2nd College ed. 1985). A “supplement” is “something added to complete a thing, make up for a deficiency, or extend or strengthen the whole.” “The American Heritage Dictionary” 1221 (William Morris ed., 2nd College ed. 1985). Therefore, according to the plain language of Rule 34.6(d), a supplemental reporter’s record may be filed when a reporter’s record has been filed and is later discovered to be incomplete. The court finds nothing in the language of the rule that supports Daniels’ interpretation. Daniels states that some, but possibly not all, of her medical records and certain deposition excerpts are contained in the three volumes of the clerk’s record filed in this appeal. She further states that the records were “certainly” introduced at trial and she merely seeks to provide a certification by the court reporter that the documents already before this court were in fact admitted exhibits. An appellant cannot circumvent the rules relating to the filing of a reporter’s record by furnishing a court reporter’s certification relating to matters included in the clerk’s record. The rules of appellate procedure provide two methods for filing a limited reporter’s record. Daniels did not attempt to avail herself of any of those methods. She cannot now file, in effect, a limited reporter’s record contrary to any of the methods permitted by the rules. OPINION:Worthen, C.J.; Worthen, C.J., Griffith, JJ. DeVasto, J., not participating.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.