In Re Lyft, Inc. v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 12, 2025
• Docket: 13-25-00490-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-25-00490-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

IN RE LYFT, INC.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices Cron and Fonseca Memorandum Opinion by Justice Cron 1

Relator Lyft, Inc. has filed an “Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Petition for Writ of

Mandamus” in the above-referenced cause. Relator asserts that the parties have fully

and finally resolved all issues in dispute between them, and relator thus requests that we

dismiss this original proceeding with prejudice.

1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not

required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus

and the unopposed motion to dismiss, is of the opinion that relator’s unopposed motion

to dismiss should be granted. See In re Contract Freighters, Inc., 646 S.W.3d 810, 813

(Tex. 2022) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); Heckman v. Williamson County, 369 S.W.3d

137, 162 (Tex. 2012); In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005)

(orig. proceeding). Accordingly, having previously abated this matter, we now reinstate

this original proceeding. We lift the stay previously imposed in this case. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 52.10. We grant relator’s unopposed motion to dismiss. We dismiss the petition for writ

of mandamus as moot. See In re Contract Freighters, Inc., 646 S.W.3d at 813; Heckman,

369 S.W.3d at 62; In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d at 737. This dismissal is

with prejudice.

JENNY CRON Justice

Delivered and filed on the 12th day of November, 2025.