Suppose that on the first day of trial, the judge tells the parties that she intends to impose time limits on the trial. Although you're concerned about the time limit imposed, you don't say anything about your concerns, and trial starts. During the trial, the court gives repeated reminders to the parties about how much time they have used and how much time they have left. Finally, the court informs you that you have one hour left to present your evidence. You realize that you will never finish, so you object and request more time. The trial court overrules your objection. Have you preserved error?
Probably not. As trial courts increasingly impose time limits on trials, and parties find those time limits too constricting, appellate courts have wrestled with when an objection to a time limit is timely. The rule to keep in mind is: object at the first possible opportunity. Waiting to object for the first time until your time is up, or almost up, will waive the objection.
For example, in Zurita v. ZVH-1 Partners, Ltd., the court of appeals found that the objection was waived when the complaining party waited until the last day of trial to object. No. 03-10-00650-CV, 2011 WL 6118573 (Tex. App.—Austin Dec. 8, 2011, pet. denied). The court did not say exactly when the objection should have been raised, but noted that the party had not objected when the time limit was first imposed and had not objected during the trial, when the court reminded the party about how much time was remaining. To be safe, if you think there is any chance that you will need more time, you should object as soon as the court lets you know that there will be a time limit imposed. Waiting risks waiving error.
-- Rich Phillips, Thompson & Knight
Comments