law-frivolous appeal sanctions | trial court sanctions discovery sanctions | egregious conduct
An appeal is frivolous if when it is brought there were no reasonable grounds to believe the
judgment would be reversed or when it is pursued in bad faith.
08-0275
PANQUITA CARTER v. UNIVERSITY TEXAS SYSTEMS; from Dallas County; 5th district (05-07-
00592-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 02-25-08, pet. denied Oct. 2008)(workers comp, compensable injury,
carpal tunnel syndrome, frivolous appeal sanctions denied)
Carter also requests that this Court impose damages against UTS and its counsel for filing a
frivolous appeal, citing rule 45 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Under rule 45, we may
award “just damages” to a prevailing party in an appeal if we determine it is frivolous after
considering the record, briefs, or other papers filed. See Solares v. Solares, 232 S.W.3d 873,
883 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2007, no pet.). Recovery is authorized if an appeal is objectively frivolous
and injures an appellee. Solares, 232 S.W.3d at 883. An appeal is frivolous if when it is brought
there were no reasonable grounds to believe the judgment would be reversed or when it is
pursued in bad faith. Solares, 232 S.W.3d at 883. We impose sanctions only under those
circumstances we find truly egregious. See Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations, Inc. v. Hennig
Production Co., Inc., 164 S.W.3d 438, 448 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet.) (where
motion alleged appellant presented incomplete record on appeal, raised critical issues for first
time on appeal, and filed inadequate brief misstating record and making unsupported
accusations, record did not evidence such egregious circumstances as to warrant sanctions). On
review of the record and briefs, and in light of our disposition of UTS's issue on appeal, we
decline to find UTS's appeal frivolous. See also In re A.W.P., 200 S.W.3d 242, 246 (Tex. App.-
Dallas 2006, no pet.) (failure to present complete record on appeal itself does not render appeal
frivolous, and we could not conclude appeal was otherwise frivolous).
We deny Carter's motion and reverse the judgment of the trial court.
08‑0745
IN THE INTEREST OF K.M. AND J.O. MINOR CHILDREN; from Bexar County; 4th district
(04‑08‑00037‑CV, ___ SW3d ___, 07‑30‑08, pet. denied Oct 2008)(accelerated appeal
concerning the trial court’s termination of parental rights to mother's children, appellate points
were determined to be frivolous) as redrafted