Eastman v. WILLOWICK APARTMENTS

Court of Appeals of Texas

Eastman v. WILLOWICK APARTMENTS

139 S.W.3d 348, 2004 WL 966319

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided June 10, 2004·No. 2-03-305-CV·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

[349]*349OPINION AND JUDGMENT

JOHN CAYCE, Chief Justice.

The court has considered appellant Ro-samond Eastman’s unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal in accordance with the parties’ settlement agreement and is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f). We also grant the motion to withdi'aw as attorney of record filed by Eastman’s counsel, Larry E. Meadows. We deny as moot Eastman’s pro se motion for extension of time to file her appellate brief.

In accordance with their agreement, the parties shall each bear their own costs of appeal, for which let execution issue. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(d).

WALKER, J. filed a dissenting opinion.

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

[349]*349OPINION AND JUDGMENT

JOHN CAYCE, Chief Justice.

The court has considered appellant Ro-samond Eastman’s unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal in accordance with the parties’ settlement agreement and is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f). We also grant the motion to withdi'aw as attorney of record filed by Eastman’s counsel, Larry E. Meadows. We deny as moot Eastman’s pro se motion for extension of time to file her appellate brief.

In accordance with their agreement, the parties shall each bear their own costs of appeal, for which let execution issue. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(d).

WALKER, J. filed a dissenting opinion.

Eastman v. WILLOWICK APARTMENTS, 139 S.W.3d 348, 2004 WL 966319 (Tex. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

139 S.W.3d 348 (Eastman v. WILLOWICK APARTMENTS) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related