in Re Steadfast Funding, LLC

Opinion

Opinion issued July 30, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

Because the respondent has since ruled on the pending motions challenged by

the petition, this Court no longer has jurisdiction to grant relief because the petition

has been rendered moot. See Tex. A&M Univ.–Kingsville v. Yarbrough, 347 S.W.3d

289, 290–91 (Tex. 2011); In re Jackson, No. 01-12-00020-CV, 2012 WL 405707,

at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 9, 2012, orig. proceeding) (per curiam)

(mem. op.) (dismissing mandamus petition as moot after relator received relief

requested).

Accordingly, we grant relators’ motion and dismiss the petition as moot. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f). We dismiss as moot the real parties in interests’

motion/renewed motion for sanctions. See TEX. R. APP. P. 45.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Kelly, and Goodman.

Footnotes

1. NO. 01-19-00463-CV ——————————— IN RE STEADFAST FUNDING, LLC, ET AL., Relators Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus MEMORANDUM OPINION Relators, Steadfast Funding, LLC, et al., have filed a motion to dismiss their petition for a writ of mandamus as moot, stating that the respondent district judge has since ruled on the pending motions it challenged in the petition.1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). No opinion has issued. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1), (c). 1 The underlying case is 2017 Yale Dev. LLC v. Steadfast Funding, LLC, et al., Cause No. 2016-64847, pending in the 190th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Beau A. Miller presiding.