The Texas Court of Appeals recently made a significant ruling regarding Tosha De Ann Chang's appeal against Joanne Nabors. The court's decision affects Chang's ability to contest a judgment made against her in a lower court. This ruling is crucial for Chang as it allows her to seek temporary relief while she navigates the appeals process.
The case, identified by docket number 03-26-00828-CV, stems from a judgment issued on August 25, 2026, by the 419th District Court of Travis County, presided over by Judge Catherine Mauzy. Chang filed an appeal shortly after the judgment, indicating her intention to challenge the lower court's decision. The court's ruling on September 18, 2026, directly addresses Chang's request for a stay on the enforcement of that judgment.
Chang's appeal centers on her request for an emergency motion to stay enforcement of the judgment while her appeal is pending. She informed the court that she had filed a similar motion in the trial court, which had not yet been ruled upon. The court noted that it was unclear whether Chang had set her motion for a hearing. In her appeal, she requested that the court either stay the enforcement of the judgment or remand the case back to the trial court for further consideration of her motion.
In its ruling, the court granted part of Chang's motion, abating the appeal and remanding the case to allow her time to have her Rule 24 motion set for a hearing. The court also recognized the need for the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine Chang's ability to afford payment of court costs under Rule 145 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. The court stated, "We grant in part Chang’s motion, abate this appeal, and remand the case to allow Chang time to have her Rule 24 motion set for hearing and determined."
The judges involved in this decision were Justices Triana, Crump, and Ellis. Their ruling effectively pauses the appeal process and directs the lower court to address Chang's financial situation regarding court costs. The court emphasized that any documents related to Rule 145 must be forwarded to them by November 2, 2026.
This ruling is significant for Chang as it allows her to seek a determination of her ability to pay court costs without the immediate pressure of enforcement of the judgment against her. If the trial court does not require her to pay costs by the time the appeal is reinstated, she will be allowed to proceed without the burden of those costs. The court's decision highlights the importance of ensuring that individuals can access the legal system, particularly when financial constraints may hinder their ability to appeal a judgment.
The impact of this ruling extends beyond Chang's case. It reinforces the principle that individuals facing financial difficulties should have the opportunity to seek justice without being barred by the costs associated with legal proceedings. This ruling may set a precedent for similar cases in the future, where appellants seek relief from court costs while appealing a judgment.
Looking ahead, Chang's case will require further action in the trial court regarding her motion for temporary relief and her ability to pay court costs. The trial court has scheduled an indigency hearing for September 23, 2026, where it will assess Chang's financial situation. Depending on the outcome of that hearing, Chang may be able to continue her appeal without the burden of court costs.
After the hearing, the trial court will need to provide the necessary documentation to the Texas Court of Appeals by November 2, 2026. If additional time is needed for any determinations, either party or the court may file a status report. If no request for more time is made, the appeal will automatically be reinstated on November 2, 2026, allowing Chang to continue her legal battle.