Big Creek Construction, LTD. v. Jerry Steele Fagan, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Jimmie Edward Fagan, Nikkie Marchant and Lisa Daves

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 18, 2025
Docket10-24-00248-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Big Creek Construction, LTD. v. Jerry Steele Fagan, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Jimmie Edward Fagan, Nikkie Marchant and Lisa Daves (Big Creek Construction, LTD. v. Jerry Steele Fagan, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Jimmie Edward Fagan, Nikkie Marchant and Lisa Daves) 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
Big Creek Construction, LTD. v. Jerry Steele Fagan, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Jimmie Edward Fagan, Nikkie Marchant and Lisa Daves, (Tex. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas

10-24-00248-CV

Big Creek Construction, LTD., Appellant

v.

Jerry Steele Fagan, Individually and on behalf of the Estate of Jimmie Edward Fagan, Nikkie Marchant, and Lisa Daves, Appellees

On appeal from the 82nd District Court of Robertson County, Texas Judge Rex Davis, presiding Trial Court Cause No. 21-01-21174-CV

CHIEF JUSTICE JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Big Creek Construction, LTD., appealed from the trial court’s

interlocutory "Order Denying in Part and Granting in Part Defendant Big

Creek Construction, Ltd.'s Amended Motion for No Evidence and Traditional

Summary Judgment." On January 3, 2025, the Court was advised that the

parties had reached a settlement and requested an abatement in order to execute the terms of the settlement. This proceeding was stayed upon the

request of the parties on January 7, 2025.

On May 16, 2025, by letter from the Clerk of this Court, the appellant

was advised that it “must provide the Court with either a motion to dismiss or

a status report within 14 days of the date of this letter or the appeal may be

dismissed for want of prosecution.” Further, the appellant was notified that

the failure to respond to the Clerk’s letter would constitute an independent

ground for the dismissal of the appeal. No motion to dismiss or other response

has been received by this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

Accordingly, we dismiss this interlocutory appeal for want of

prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

MATT JOHNSON Chief Justice

OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: June 18, 2025 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Appeal dismissed CV06

Big Creek Construction, LTD. v. Fagan Page 2

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Big Creek Construction, LTD. v. Jerry Steele Fagan, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Jimmie Edward Fagan, Nikkie Marchant and Lisa Daves, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/big-creek-construction-ltd-v-jerry-steele-fagan-individually-and-on-texapp-2025.