In re Miller
| Decision Date | 06 October 2016 |
| Docket Number | NO. 01-16-00324-CV,NO. 01-16-00132-CV,01-16-00132-CV,01-16-00324-CV |
| Parties | IN RE PAULA M. MILLER AND MICHAEL BROWN, Relators |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas |
This original proceeding arises from two related mandamus petitions in connection with contempt proceedings against the relator, Paula Miller. In the first petition filed on the morning before her contempt hearing, Miller requested that we compel the trial court to (1) dismiss contempt proceedings against her, (2) return a cash bond, and (3) reverse the trial court's order directing Miller to release her lis pendens filed in the real property records.1 Miller further requested that we recuse the trial court judge and that the contempt hearing be assigned to an independent judge. We denied Miller's request for an emergency stay of the scheduled contempt proceedings. In a subsequent mandamus petition, filed after the contempt proceedings were concluded, Miller joined by Michael Brown, requests that we (1) compel the trial court to order the return of a cash bond that Brown paid to ensure Miller's appearance for the contempt hearing, and (2) order reimbursement of their attorney's fees expended in seeking return of the bail money. We deny the petitions.
In 2011, Paula Miller sued James A. Prince for a divorce in Harris County, alleging that a common law marriage existed between them. The trial court ruled that no marriage existed; we subsequently affirmed its decision on appeal. See Miller v. Prince, No. 01-13-00243-CV, 2015 WL 545685 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 10, 2015, no pet.).
In November 2013, while the appeal was pending, JAS Family Limited Partnership # 4, Ltd., a company in which James Prince has a financial interest, filed a petition to remove several notices of lis pendens and an affidavit of adverse possession from title records to property it owned. Miller had filed the notices in theBrazoria County real property records to halt the sale of the property. Miller alleged that it belonged to the community estate. On November 12, 2013, the trial court conducted a hearing.
After the hearing, Miller moved to recuse the trial court judge. The trial court judge declined to recuse and referred the motion to the Presiding Judge of the Second Administrative Region pursuant to Rule 18a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 18a. In January 2014, the Presiding Judge denied Miller's motion to recuse, finding it to be "groundless and filed in bad faith for purposes of harassment and/or to cause unnecessary delay without sufficient cause," and ordered Miller to pay JAS's attorney's fees.
Meanwhile, on November 14, 2013, Miller sought a writ of prohibition from this Court to enjoin the trial court from ruling in the Brazoria County proceeding. In conjunction with her petition, Miller requested an emergency stay of the proceedings. We denied the emergency stay and the en banc Court denied Miller's subsequent motion for rehearing en banc. We also denied Miller's petition for writ of prohibition. In re Miller, 433 S.W.3d 82 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, no pet.).
Miller further sought to stay the proceedings by filing for bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas. After being denied further requests for continuances in the case, the bankruptcy court gaveMiller the option of either (i) taking the stand and continuing her examination by the Chapter 13 trustee or (ii) dismissing her case with prejudice. Miller chose to dismiss her bankruptcy case with prejudice. The bankruptcy court issued its dismissal order on August 11, 2014.
In January 2015, the state trial court (1) denied a request by Miller to abate the case and (2) granted JAS's requested relief. The court ordered that the notices of lis pendens and affidavit of adverse possession filed by Miller "should be released and be of no further force and effect." The court ordered Miller to execute releases of the lis pendens and affidavit of adverse possession. Miller appealed the trial court's order. In July 2015, after the clerk of this Court notified Miller that her appeal was subject to dismissal, we dismissed the appeal because Miller failed to pay the necessary fees and arrange for preparation of the record. Miller v. JAS Family Ltd. Partnership #4, Ltd., No. 01-15-00286-CV, 2015 WL 4099330 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] July 7, 2015, no pet.).
After we dismissed Miller's appeal, the trial court ordered Miller to appear at a hearing in September 2015 to execute the releases it had ordered her to execute. Miller failed to appear at the hearing. The trial court then ordered Miller to appear on November 19, 2015 for contempt proceedings. After Miller failed to appear for the contempt hearing, the trial court ordered that Miller be taken into custody and brought before the court:
It is ORDERED that any Sheriff or constable of the State of Texas shall attach Paula M. Miller and bring her immediately to the courtroom of the undersigned. If this Court is not in session at the time she is delivered, she shall be held in custody of the Sheriff of Brazoria County, Texas until the next occasion that this Court is in session. The Sheriff of Brazoria County Texas is thereafter ordered to bring her to the courtroom of this Court on the earliest date and time that this Court is in session.
The court further ordered that Miller "may be released upon payment of a $25,000.00 cash appearance bond requiring her to appear on the first date that this Court is in session and to remain thereafter day to day until the contempt in this cause has been concluded."
Miller was taken into custody on December 9, 2015. Michael Brown produced a $25,000 cash bond on December 11, 2015 to secure Miller's release. The sheriff's office provided Brown with a receipt for the return of the money after the proceedings were concluded. Cf. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 17.02 (West Supp. 2015) ().
Miller then appeared before the court on December 15, 2015. She argued that the contempt proceedings should be dismissed as moot because (1) she had appeared before the court, and (2) prior to the hearing, she had signed releases that she drafted rather than those approved by the trial court. The trial court denied the request to dismiss the proceedings and a contempt hearing was scheduled for February 9, 2016.
Before the February 2016 hearing, Miller moved to continue or dismiss the contempt hearing, arguing that, because she is a licensed attorney, she was entitled to (1) post a personal recognizance bond rather than the $25,000 cash bond, and (2) an independent judge to hear arguments regarding contempt.2
At the February 9th hearing, the trial court denied Miller's request to dismiss the contempt proceedings. The court ordered the parties to prepare briefs and continued the contempt hearing to the afternoon of February 19, 2016.3
On the morning of her February 19, 2016 contempt hearing, Miller filed a petition for writ of mandamus with this Court requesting that we (1) dismiss the contempt proceedings against her, (2) compel return of the $25,000 cash bond, (3) reverse the trial court's order to sign and file releases, (4) recuse the trial court judge from any further proceedings in the case, and (5) have the contempt hearing assigned to an independent judge. In conjunction with this petition, Miller again sought an emergency stay of proceedings in the trial court, including the afternoon contempt hearing scheduled that day. We denied Miller's request. This opinion disposes of the mandamus petition.
James Prince then filed an application to garnish the bail money paid into the court registry to satisfy a judgment that Miller owed from a related proceeding.
At the February 19 hearing, the trial court held Miller in contempt. It ordered that she be jailed until she executed the releases of the lis pendens in the real property records as ordered. Although the trial court's judgment indicates that there is a reporter's record, Miller has not provided a copy of the record of the hearing.
Miller then executed the releases; thus, the trial court did not issue a bench warrant for her arrest. The court also issued a judgment against Miller for $8,647, for JAS's attorney's fees.
Brown moved in the trial court for the return of the bond money that he had posted.4 Miller and Brown filed a second mandamus petition, also seeking the return of the $25,000 bond and reimbursement of attorney's fees.
Miller's first petition, filed on the morning before her contempt hearing, requested that we cease or dismiss the contempt proceedings against her, return the cash bond, recuse the trial judge from hearing the contempt matter, require an independent judge to hear her contempt matter, and reverse the trial court's order to release the notices in the real property records. The second petition, filed by Millerand Brown after Miller was held in contempt and had complied with the trial court's order, requests (1) the return of the money paid to ensure Miller's appearance for her contempt proceedings and (2) attorney's fees. The second petition also requests that we (1) "Order as void any finding by the trial court of Contempt against Miller pertaining to the Show Cause Hearings and/or releases;" and (2) "Order as void each of the releases of lis pendens and affidavit of adverse possession that the trial court ordered Miller to sign under threat of jail."
To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must demonstrate that (1) the trial court clearly abused its discretion; and (2) the relator has no adequate remedy by appeal. In re Reece, 341 S.W.3d 360, 364 (Tex. 2011, orig. proceeding). A trial court clearly abuses its...
To continue reading
Request your trial