Aguilar v. LVDVD, L.C.

Before the Court for determination is appellants’ motion to strike supplementation of the record in this summary judgment case. Appellants contend that any reporter’s record of the hearing on summary judgment is inappropriate and should not be considered. As the reporter’s record apparently contains rulings on objections to summary judgment affidavits, we conclude it may appropriately be included in the appellate record. We deny the motion for the following reasons.

Appellants rely upon City of Houston v. Clear Creek Basin Authority, 589 S.W.2d 671 (Tex. 1979), and El Paso Associates, Ltd. v. J.R. Thurman & Co., 786 S.W.2d 17 (Tex. App.–El Paso 1990, no writ). First, appellants assert that the cases stand for the proposition that recording of summary judgment hearings is a practice “neither necessary nor appropriate” to the purposes of such a hearing. Furthermore, appellants assert that appellee is attempting to use the supplemental record to circumvent the October 12, 2001 order denying the motion for partial summary judgment.