Background
Jennifer Lynn Perkins appealed the trial court’s final judgment in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. During the appeal, she filed several motions challenging the contents and accuracy of the reporter’s record.
Perkins asserted that the record omitted transcripts from relevant hearings and that portions already filed were inaccurate. She also claimed that at least one exhibit admitted into evidence was missing from the record.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted in part Perkins’s motion to abate briefing, abated the appeal, and remanded the case to the trial court. Citing Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(e)(3), the court explained that the trial court must resolve disputes concerning a reporter’s record after the record has been filed in the appellate court.
On remand, the trial court must determine whether the appellate record is incomplete or inaccurate, whether the requested additional transcripts exist and are relevant, and whether Perkins may supplement the record with the materials she seeks. A supplemental reporter’s or clerk’s record containing that determination is due September 21, 2026; the appeal will then be reinstated, and Perkins’s brief will be due thirty days later. The court dismissed her motion to expedite consideration of the abatement motion as moot.
Key Takeaways
- A dispute over the completeness or accuracy of a filed reporter’s record may be submitted to the trial court for resolution under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(e)(3).
- The court did not decide the merits of Perkins’s appeal or determine whether the disputed materials must be added to the record.
- Briefing is suspended until the trial court resolves the record dispute and a supplemental record is filed.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates the procedure Texas appellate courts use when parties dispute whether a reporter’s record accurately and completely reflects the trial-court proceedings. Factual questions about missing transcripts, exhibits, and other record materials are sent to the trial court before appellate briefing continues.
For appellate practitioners, the decision underscores the importance of identifying record defects early and obtaining a trial-court determination when the parties disagree about what occurred or what belongs in the appellate record.