in Re Jill Kathryn Arno Peterson

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 7, 2019
Docket01-18-01029-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in Re Jill Kathryn Arno Peterson (in Re Jill Kathryn Arno Peterson) 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
in Re Jill Kathryn Arno Peterson, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Appellate case name: In re Jill Kathryn Arno Peterson

Appellate case number: 01-18-01029-CV

Trial court case number: 2018-43305

Trial court: 280th District Court of Harris County

Relator, Jill Kathryn Arno Peterson, filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to vacate the Honorable Angelina Gooden’s November 9, 2018 order granting the motion for new trial filed by real party in interest, Donald Jonathan Peterson. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 7.2(b), the Court “must abate the [original] proceeding to allow the successor to reconsider the original party’s decision.” TEX. R. APP. P. 7.2(b). The proceeding is ABATED and REMANDED to the trial court. Within 15 days of the date of this order, relator is directed to obtain a hearing date, if necessary, from the trial court coordinator and to notify all parties of such date. The hearing shall be set for a date no later than 30 days after the date of this order. The trial court coordinator shall advise the Clerk of this Court of the hearing date as soon as it is set. Within 40 days of the date of this order, the district clerk shall file a supplemental clerk’s record and reporter’s record, if any, with the ruling by the successor, the Honorable Barbara J. Stalder. This case is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this Court’s active docket. This original proceeding will be reinstated on this Court’s active docket when the successor respondent has reconsidered the original respondent’s decision and either party informs the Clerk of this Court of the ruling with a certified copy of the order. This Court will also consider a motion to reinstate by either party. It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: ___/s/ Justice Richard Hightower_____________  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: ____January 7, 2019____

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re Jill Kathryn Arno Peterson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jill-kathryn-arno-peterson-texapp-2019.