Claudia Dominguez and Efren Dominguez v. Laser Vaginal Rejuvenation Institute, Medical Associates, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 26, 2008
Docket13-08-00144-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Claudia Dominguez and Efren Dominguez v. Laser Vaginal Rejuvenation Institute, Medical Associates, Inc. (Claudia Dominguez and Efren Dominguez v. Laser Vaginal Rejuvenation Institute, Medical Associates, 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
Claudia Dominguez and Efren Dominguez v. Laser Vaginal Rejuvenation Institute, Medical Associates, Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion



NUMBER 13-08-00144-CV



COURT OF APPEALS



THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS



CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________________________

CLAUDIA DOMINGUEZ AND EFREN DOMINGUEZ, Appellants,



v.



LASER VAGINAL REJUVENATION

INSTITUTE, MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. , Appellee.

_____________________________________________________________



On appeal from the 92nd District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________



MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam



Appellants, Claudia Dominguez and Efren Dominguez, brought an appeal from a judgment entered by the 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-1305-06-A-1. Appellants have filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on grounds that they no longer desire to prosecute it.

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. Because the motion lacks an agreement between the parties regarding the assessment of costs, costs will be taxed against appellants. See id. 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

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 26th day of June, 2008.



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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Claudia Dominguez and Efren Dominguez v. Laser Vaginal Rejuvenation Institute, Medical Associates, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claudia-dominguez-and-efren-dominguez-v-laser-vagi-texapp-2008.