Baltasar D. Cruz v. James Van Sickle, Karl- Thomas Musselman

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided March 21, 2013·No. 05-13-00191-CV·Published

Opinion

Order entered March 21, 2013

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-00191-CV

BALTASAR D. CRUZ, Appellant

V.

JAMES VAN SICKLE, KARL- THOMAS MUSSELMAN, ET AL, Appellee

On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-09275

ORDER Based on the filings before us and civil practice and remedies code section 27.008, we

DENY appellees Karl-Thomas Musselman d/b/a Burnt Orange Report and Katherine

Haenschen’s “motion to dismiss, or in the alternative to abate, for lack of jurisdiction.” See TEX.

CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 27.008(b), (c) (West Supp. 2012).

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS JUSTICE

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

Baltasar D. Cruz v. James Van Sickle, Karl- Thomas Musselman, (Tex. Ct. App. 2013).

Baltasar D. Cruz v. James Van Sickle, Karl- Thomas Musselman (Baltasar D. Cruz v. James Van Sickle, Karl- Thomas Musselman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

§ 27.008
Texas CP § 27.008(b)