Kayla Range v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
Date FiledJuly 24, 2026
Docket03-26-00444-CV
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-26-00444-CV
Kayla Range, Appellant
v.
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, Appellee
FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF BELL COUNTY
NO. 26CCV00087, THE HONORABLE PAUL A. MOTZ, JUDGE PRESIDING
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
This case is before the Court on appellant’s unopposed motion to abate and for
extension of time to file her brief. After appellant was informed by the justice court that she
missed the deadline to file an appeal from its judgment, she filed a verified application for writ of
certiorari in county court. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 506.4. The trial court denied appellant’s
application for writ of certiorari, stating in its written order that it did so “[a]fter hearing and
considering . . . the pleadings and evidence.” Appellant timely requested findings of fact and
conclusions of law and provided timely notice of past-due findings of fact and conclusions of
law. However, to date, the trial court has not issued any written findings or conclusions.
Appellant argues that without any findings, she is forced to guess at the reasons
for the trial court’s denial of her application, effectively preventing her from properly presenting
her case in this appeal. For instance, she contends that the trial court’s decision to deny her
application may have been based on the sufficiency of her sworn statement or its weighing of the
facts sworn to in her application. She requests that we abate this case and remand for the trial
court to enter appropriate findings and conclusions.
“A trial court’s failure to file findings in response to a timely and proper request
is . . . ‘presumed harmful, unless “the record before the appellate court affirmatively shows that
the complaining party has suffered no injury.”’” Ad Villarai, LLC v. Chan Il Pak, 519 S.W.3d 132,
135 (Tex. 2017) (quoting Cherne Indus., Inc. v. Magallanes, 763 S.W.2d 768, 772 (Tex. 1989)).
Based on the trial court’s representation that it denied appellant’s application after considering
“the pleadings and evidence,” it is presumed that appellant is harmed by the trial court’s failure
to issue written findings and conclusions. And “[w]hen the trial court’s failure is harmful, the
preferred remedy is for the appellate court to direct the trial court to file the missing findings.”
Id. at 136. We therefore grant appellant’s motion to abate, abate this appeal, and remand the
case to the trial court for it to send its written findings of fact and conclusions of law to the
parties. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 296, 297. The written findings and conclusions should be submitted
to this Court in a supplemental clerk’s record. This case will be reinstated once the supplemental
clerk’s record is received by this Court.
Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file her brief is granted in part.
Appellant shall have thirty days from the date this appeal is reinstated to file her brief.
It is ordered on July 24, 2026.
2
Before Justices Triana, Crump, and Ellis
Abated and Remanded
Filed: July 24, 2026
3