Danita E. Anderson v. Erin Capital Managment as Assignee of Citibank Platium Select

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 15, 2011
• Docket: 04-10-00857-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-10-00857-CV

Danita E. ANDERSON, Appellant

v.

ERIN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT as Assignee of Citibank Platinum Select, Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 5, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 354484 Honorable Linda F. Penn, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 15, 2011

DISMISSED

The parties have filed a document titled, “Agreed Motion to Dismiss Appeal.” In the

motion, the parties state they “have resolved all issues related to this action” and “ask the Court

to dismiss Appellee’s original cause of action” “with prejudice to the refiling of same by either

party.” The motion is signed by appellant, who is pro se, and by appellee’s attorney of record.

Based on the joint motion, the intent of the parties is to dismiss not only this appeal but the

underlying cause of action with prejudice. 04-10-00857-CV

The motion is granted. All previous orders and judgments, both trial and appellate, are set

aside and the cause is dismissed with prejudice. See Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, & Smith, Inc.

v. Hughes, 827 S.W.2d 859, 859 (Tex. 1992); Exxon Corp. v. Butler, 619 S.W.2d 399, 399 (Tex.

1981); Freeman v. Burrows, 171 S.W.2d 863, 863-64 (1943); Caballero v. Heart of Texas Pizza,

L.L.C., 70 S.W.3d 180, 181 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2001, no pet.). Costs of appeal are taxed

against appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) (“Absent agreement of the parties, the court will

tax costs against the appellant.”).

-2-