Alan Arriaga-Juarez, Smart Roofing Solutions and Lorena Quintanilla v. Strategic Roofing Solutions, LLC; Michael G. Martin

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 13, 2025
• Docket: 01-25-00017-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued May 13, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-25-00017-CV ——————————— ALAN ARRIAGA-JUAREZ, SMART ROOFING SOLUTIONS, AND LORENA QUINTANILLA, Appellants V. STRATEGIC ROOFING SOLUTIONS, LLC AND MICHAEL G. MARTIN, Appellees

On Appeal from the 458th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 18-DCV-252422

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants, Alan Arriaga-Juarez, Smart Roofing Solutions, and Lorena

Quintanilla, filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s December 11, 2024

judgment. On April 30, 2025, appellants filed a “Motion to Dismiss Appeal With Prejudice.” In their motion, appellants stated that the parties had “reached a

settlement agreement to compromise and settle their differences.” Appellants

therefore requested that the Court dismiss the appeal.1

No other party has filed a notice of appeal, and no opinion has issued. See

TEX R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(2), (c). Appellants’ motion does not include a certificate of

conference stating whether appellees, Strategic Roofing Solutions, LLC and Michael

G. Martin, are opposed to the relief requested in the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P.

10.1(a)(5). However, more than ten days have passed and no party has opposed the

motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.3(a)(2).

Accordingly, we grant appellants’ motion and dismiss the appeal. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f). We dismiss all other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Gunn, and Dokupil.

1 We note that appellants’ motion requested that “costs on appeal [be] taxed against the party incurring same.” However, in a voluntary dismissal of an appeal, the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure require the Court to tax costs against appellant unless there is an “agreement of the parties.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d). While appellants’ motion notes that the parties “settled their differences,” there is no evidence in the appellate record of an agreement between the parties regarding costs. Therefore, that request is denied and appellate costs will be taxed against appellants.