In Re Dickinson Forty, LLC ("Dickinson"), Binnacle Development, LLC ("Binnacle"), And Jerry LeBlanc ("LeBlanc") v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 22, 2024
• Docket: 01-23-00870-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued February 22, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-23-00870-CV ——————————— IN RE DICKINSON FORTY, LLC, BINNACLE DEVELOPMENT, LLC, AND JERRY LEBLANC, Relators

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss the petition for writ of

mandamus because the trial court signed an amended order on January 25, 2024,

permitting relators to replead their motion to designate responsible third party.1

1 The underlying case is Lexington 26, L.P. D/B/A Colina Homes v. Dickinson Forty, LLC, Binnacle Development, LLC, Jerry LeBlanc, and Adams Homes Lone Star, LLC , cause number 21-CV-0871, pending in the 405th District Court of Galveston County, Texas, the Honorable Jared Robinson presiding. “A case becomes moot if, since the time of filing, there has ceased to exist a

justiciable controversy between the parties—that is, if the issues presented are no

longer ‘live,’ or if the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.”

Heckman v. Williamson Cty., 369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012). If a case has

become moot, the court must dismiss. See id. Because relators have received the

relief they sought in their petition for writ of mandamus, the petition is moot and

must be dismissed. See In re Prosperity Bank, No. 01-22-00382-CV, 2022 WL

2919941, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] July 26, 2022, orig. proceeding)

(mem. op.).

We grant the motion and dismiss the petition as moot. Any pending motions

are also dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Countiss, and Rivas-Molloy.