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.
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.
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