Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Paul O’Brien appealed a decision from the 53rd District Court of Travis County in a family law matter. The appellate court previously abated the appeal after confirming its jurisdiction to consider Tiffanie O’Brien’s motion to modify under Texas Family Code Sections 109.001(b-3) and (b-4). The trial court, presided over by Judge Laurie Eiserloh, conducted a hearing on the modification motion on May 28, 2026.
Tiffanie O’Brien filed a status report and motion to extend the existing abatement, requesting additional time for the trial court to render its decision after the May 28 hearing.
The Court’s Holding
The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, granted the motion to extend abatement. The appellate court abated the appeal for an additional 30 days to allow the trial court more time to rule on the pending modification motion.
The court established a deadline of July 24, 2026, for filing the next status update. At that time, Tiffanie must file either a motion to dismiss the appeal, a motion to reinstate the appeal, or a status report on the trial court’s ruling accompanied by a motion to extend the abatement further if needed.
Key Takeaways
- Appellate courts may abate appeals to allow trial courts additional time to resolve pending matters.
- The extended abatement period is 30 days from the June 24, 2026 order, with a status report deadline of July 24, 2026.
- Family law modification motions may require extended deliberation time from the trial court.
Why It Matters
This order reflects the appellate system’s accommodation of trial court deliberation timelines in family law matters. For parties with pending modification motions before trial courts, this case illustrates that appellate abatement extends the overall timeline for final resolution, though it protects the rights of the appealing party by maintaining the case’s active status.
The July 24 deadline creates a hard stop for the trial court to either rule or face potential appellate action. This procedural framework ensures that parties do not face indefinite delays while simultaneously allowing trial courts sufficient time for thorough consideration of modification requests.