in Re Golden Corral Corp., ZG GC Austin, L.L.C., and Big Red Dog Inc. D/B/A Big Red Dog Engineering and Consulting
This text of in Re Golden Corral Corp., ZG GC Austin, L.L.C., and Big Red Dog Inc. D/B/A Big Red Dog Engineering and Consulting (in Re Golden Corral Corp., ZG GC Austin, L.L.C., and Big Red Dog Inc. D/B/A Big Red Dog Engineering and Consulting) 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
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-18-00745-CV
In re Golden Corral Corp., ZG GC Austin L.L.C., and Big Red Dog Inc. d/b/a Big Red Dog Engineering and Consulting
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relators Golden Corral Corp. and ZG GC Austin L.L.C. have filed a petition for
writ of mandamus, and relator Big Red Dog Inc. d/b/a Big Red Dog Engineering and Consulting
has filed a joinder in the petition. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1; see also Tex. R. App. P. 9.7.
Relators seek to have this Court direct the trial court to (1) set aside and vacate its order denying
relators’ joint motion for leave to designate responsible third parties and Golden Corral and ZG’s
supplemental motion for leave to designate responsible third parties and (2) grant the motion.
See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.004. Relators also filed a motion for emergency
temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.10(a). Having reviewed the petition, the responses, and
the record provided, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a); see
also, e.g., In re Dawson, 550 S.W.3d 625, 629 (Tex. 2018) (orig. proceeding) (granting
mandamus relief from trial court’s order granting motion to designate because defendant’s
discovery responses before limitations ran were insufficient to notify plaintiff that defendant
might designate independent contractor as responsible third party and did not satisfy Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 33.004(d)’s statutory requirement “to timely disclose that
the person may be designated as a responsible third party under the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedure”); In re Bustamante, 510 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2016, orig.
proceeding) (interpreting Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 33.004(d) “to require
a defendant to disclose a potential responsible third party before the expiration of the statute of
limitations, if that is possible” but finding timely disclosure not possible when statute of
limitations ran one day after suit filed). We dismiss as moot the motion for emergency
temporary relief.
__________________________________________ Scott K. Field, Justice
Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Field and Toth
Filed: December 4, 2018
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re Golden Corral Corp., ZG GC Austin, L.L.C., and Big Red Dog Inc. D/B/A Big Red Dog Engineering and Consulting, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-golden-corral-corp-zg-gc-austin-llc-and-big-red-dog-inc-dba-texapp-2018.