Danny Bell v. Unistar Leasing, Division of United Computer Capital Corp.
This text of Danny Bell v. Unistar Leasing, Division of United Computer Capital Corp. (Danny Bell v. Unistar Leasing, Division of United Computer Capital Corp.) 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
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice
Paul W. Green, Justice
Sarah B. Duncan, Justice
Delivered and Filed: February 16, 2000
DISMISSED
The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss this appeal, stating that they have fully compromised and settled all issues in dispute. The motion is granted. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1). Because the cause is moot, all previous orders and judgments, both trial and appellate, are set aside and the cause is dismissed. 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, 141 Tex. 318, 171 S.W.2d 863, 863-64 (1943); Panterra v. American Dairy Queen, 908 S.W.2d 300, 301 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1995, no writ). Costs of appeal are taxed against the parties who incurred them.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Danny Bell v. Unistar Leasing, Division of United Computer Capital Corp., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/danny-bell-v-unistar-leasing-division-of-united-co-texapp-2000.