Celia Sexton Tate and 1826 SPID Business Center, LLC v. Carter L. Tate and C. C. Ambassador Row, LLC
This text of Celia Sexton Tate and 1826 SPID Business Center, LLC v. Carter L. Tate and C. C. Ambassador Row, LLC (Celia Sexton Tate and 1826 SPID Business Center, LLC v. Carter L. Tate and C. C. Ambassador Row, LLC) 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.
Opinion
NUMBER 13-15-00182-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________
CELIA SEXTON TATE AND 1826 SPID BUSINESS CENTER, LLC, Appellants,
V.
CARTER L. TATE AND C. C. AMBASSADOR ROW, LLC, Appellees. ____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Perkes Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellants, Celia Sexton Tate and 1826 SPID Business Center, LLC, perfected an
appeal from a judgment entered by the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in
cause number 2014-DCV-0878-B. Appellants have now filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal on grounds that the parties have reached an agreement to settle and
compromise their differences. Appellants requests that this Court dismiss the appeal.
The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellants’ motion to
dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 42.1(a). Appellants’ motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby
DISMISSED. In accordance with the agreement of the parties, costs are taxed against
the party incurring same. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) (“Absent agreement of the parties,
the court will tax costs against the appellant.”). Having dismissed the appeal at
appellants’ request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will
issue forthwith.
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the 30th day of July, 2015.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Celia Sexton Tate and 1826 SPID Business Center, LLC v. Carter L. Tate and C. C. Ambassador Row, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/celia-sexton-tate-and-1826-spid-business-center-ll-texapp-2015.