ADT Security Services, Inc. v. Van Peterson Fine Jewelers

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in ADT Security Services, Inc. v. Van Peterson Fine Jewelers. Read the opinion of the Court — 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 9809
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided June 19, 2015·No. 05-15-00646-CV·Published

Opinion

Order entered June 19, 2015

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-15-00646-CV

ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC., Appellant

V.

VAN PETERSON FINE JEWELERS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 09-12111

ORDER On June 3, 2015, we denied the unopposed motion of nonresident attorney Charles C.

Eblen for pro hac vice admission without prejudice to filing a motion accompanied by a motion

of the resident practicing Texas attorney with whom he shall be associated. On June 8, 2015, the

Court received the motion of resident counsel in support of Mr. Eblen’s unopposed motion for

pro hac vice admission.

Accordingly, we VACATE our order dated June 3, 2015. We now GRANT the June 2,

2015 unopposed motion for pro hac vice admission of nonresident attorney Charles C. Eblen.

We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to add Charles C. Eblen as counsel pro hac vice.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS JUSTICE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ADT Security Services, Inc. v. Van Peterson Fine Jewelers, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

ADT Security Services, Inc. v. Van Peterson Fine Jewelers (ADT Security Services, Inc. v. Van Peterson Fine Jewelers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.