in Re Trey Melcher and Yvonne Melcher

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 2, 2016
• Docket: 14-16-00130-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Abatement Order filed June 2, 2016

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-16-00130-CV ____________

IN RE TREY MELCHER AND YVONNE MELCHER, ET AL, Relators

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 215th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2011-52524

ABATEMENT ORDER

On February 19, 2006, relators 1 filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West. 2004). In the petition, relators requested that this court compel the Honorable Elaine Palmer, Judge of the 215th

1 Relators are Trey Melcher and Yvonne Evie Melcher, Trustees of the Evie Melcher Non- Exempt Trust; Melcher Investments; Bill E. Lewis and Richard L. Kerr, Jr., Co-Trustees of the Lucille Birmingham Melcher Management Trust and the Leroy Melcher Marital Deduction Trust, and former Co-Trustees of the Evie Melcher Non-Exempt Trust, and as for Co-Executors of the Estate of Lucille Birmingham Melcher (collectively, the “Melchers”). District Court, Harris County, Texas, to set aside her August 28, 2015 order granting the supplemental motion for sanctions filed by Harris County in trial court cause number 2011-52524, styled Harris County, et al. v. S.K. Brothers, Inc., et al.

On May 31, 2016, relators filed an agreed motion to abate this original proceeding for at least sixty days to allow the parties to explore settlement options. The agreed motion to abate is GRANTED. Accordingly, we issue the following order:

The original proceeding is abated for a period of sixty days from the date of this order, at which time relators and real parties in interest are directed to advise the court of the status of the case. The original proceeding is treated as a closed case, and removed from this court’s active docket. The original proceeding will be reinstated on this court’s active docket when the parties file a motion to dismiss the original proceeding or other dispositive motion. This court will also consider an appropriate motion to reinstate the original proceeding, or the court may reinstate the original proceeding on its own motion.

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM