In Re Intercontinental Terminals Company, LLC v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Intercontinental Terminals Company, LLC v. the State of Texas (In Re Intercontinental Terminals Company, LLC v. the State of Texas) 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
Opinion issued March 28, 2023
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-22-00089-CV ——————————— IN RE INTERCONTINENTAL TERMINALS COMPANY, LLC, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator Intercontinental Terminals Company, LLC advised this Court on
March 1, 2022 that the parties had mediated and reached a settlement but that the
settlement was subject to the approval of the Department of Labor under the
Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act.1 When no further update was
received, the Court issued an order on July 28, 2022, requesting a status update
1 The underlying case is Michael Grable v. Texas Mooring, LLC and Intercontinental Terminals Company, LLC, cause number 2019-59120, pending in the 165th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Ursula A. Hall presiding. within ten days of the date of the order. Real party in interest Michael Grable
responded on August 5, 2022, stating that the Department of Labor had approved
the settlement and that resolution of the settlement should be completed within thirty
days and the parties would file a joint motion for dismissal. Although real party
advised this Court via letter filed on August 26, 2022 that the parties had filed a joint
stipulation to dismiss the trial court case with prejudice, no motion to dismiss the
original proceeding, or any further update, was filed.
On November 10, 2022, the Court issued an order advising the parties that it
had come to the Court’s attention that the trial court had signed orders of nonsuit
dismissing the plaintiff’s (real party’s) claims with prejudice. Accordingly, the
Court advised the parties that the Court might dismiss the original proceeding as
moot unless relator filed a response within ten days explaining why the proceeding
was not moot. Relator failed to file a response, but real party filed a letter on
November 23, 2022, stating that the controversy between the parties had been
resolved and no justiciable controversy remained pending in the trial court.
Therefore, real party asserted that the petition for writ of mandamus should be
dismissed as moot.
We dismiss this proceeding as moot. Any other pending motions are also
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Kelly and Goodman.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Intercontinental Terminals Company, LLC v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-intercontinental-terminals-company-llc-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.