Alliance Auto Auction of Dallas, Inc. v. Lone Star Cleburne Autoplex, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 11, 2024
Docket10-19-00226-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Alliance Auto Auction of Dallas, Inc. v. Lone Star Cleburne Autoplex, Inc. (Alliance Auto Auction of Dallas, Inc. v. Lone Star Cleburne Autoplex, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alliance Auto Auction of Dallas, Inc. v. Lone Star Cleburne Autoplex, Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-19-00226-CV

ALLIANCE AUTO AUCTION OF DALLAS, INC., Appellant v.

LONE STAR CLEBURNE AUTOPLEX, INC., Appellee

From the 18th District Court Johnson County, Texas Trial Court No. DC-C201900316

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Lone Star Cleburne Autoplex, Inc. and Alliance Auto Auction of Dallas, Inc. filed

a “Joint Motion for Dismissal with Prejudice.” The parties have fully and finally resolved

all claims in this case asserted by Lone Star against Alliance and jointly request that the

Court dismiss all claims by Lone Star against Alliance with prejudice and with each of

the parties bearing its own attorney’s fees, expenses, and costs.

While we have no authority to simply dismiss the suit in the trial court, see TEX. R.

APP. P. 43.2, we have the authority to vacate the trial court's judgment and dismiss the case by agreement of the parties. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1 (a) (2) (A); 43.2 (e); Young

Materials Corp. v. Smith, 4 S.W.3d 84 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.).

Accordingly, the parties’ “Joint Motion for Dismissal with Prejudice,” filed on

April 2, 2024, is granted to the extent authorized. The trial court's “Order Denying

Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Case Filed by Defendant Alliance Auto Auction

of Dallas, Inc.,” filed on July 2, 2019 is vacated, and the case is dismissed with prejudice.

See id. Further, pursuant to the parties’ agreement, all costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees

are ordered taxed against the party incurring same. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1), (d).

Because the Court was unable to grant the entirety of the parties' motion, the Court

has endeavored to implement the substance of the parties' agreed motion to achieve the

same result. If the parties determine that the judgment of the Court does not accomplish

the parties' intended result, a timely motion for rehearing must be filed which addresses

the manner in which the Court can implement the agreement of the parties within the

limitations of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1; 43.2; 49.1.

TOM GRAY Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Motion granted Vacated and case dismissed with prejudice Opinion delivered and filed April 11, 2024 [CV06]

Alliance Auto Auction of Dallas, Inc. v. Lone Star Cleburne Autoplex, Inc. Page 2

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

Related

Young Materials Corp. v. Ronnie Smith
4 S.W.3d 84 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Alliance Auto Auction of Dallas, Inc. v. Lone Star Cleburne Autoplex, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alliance-auto-auction-of-dallas-inc-v-lone-star-cleburne-autoplex-inc-texapp-2024.