Eduardo v. Rodriguez v. Juan Guajardo, Jr., Individually and J. Guajardo Jr. Farms, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 29, 2008
Docket13-08-00452-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Eduardo v. Rodriguez v. Juan Guajardo, Jr., Individually and J. Guajardo Jr. Farms, Inc. (Eduardo v. Rodriguez v. Juan Guajardo, Jr., Individually and J. Guajardo Jr. Farms, 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
Eduardo v. Rodriguez v. Juan Guajardo, Jr., Individually and J. Guajardo Jr. Farms, Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-08-00452-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

EDUARDO V. RODRIGUEZ, Appellant,

v.

JUAN GUAJARDO, JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND J. GUAJARDO, JR. FARMS, INC., Appellees. ____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 404th District Court of Cameron County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Yañez, Garza, and Vela Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Eduardo V. Rodriguez, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by

the 404th District Court of Cameron County, Texas, in cause number 2007-01-619-G.

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on grounds that he incorrectly filed a

Notice of Accelerated Appeal when he filed the Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Appellant requests that Cause Number 13-08-00452-CV be dismissed, so that only the Petition for

Writ of Mandamus, Cause Number 13-08-0411-CV, remain.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s motion to

dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX . R. APP.

P. 42.1(a). Appellant’s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant. See TEX .

R. APP. P. 42.1(d). Having dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for

rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this the 29th day of August, 2008.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Eduardo v. Rodriguez v. Juan Guajardo, Jr., Individually and J. Guajardo Jr. Farms, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eduardo-v-rodriguez-v-juan-guajardo-jr-individuall-texapp-2008.