In Re: Yellowjacket Oilfield Services, LLC v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedNovember 14, 2023
Docket01-23-00674-CV
StatusPublished

This text of In Re: Yellowjacket Oilfield Services, LLC v. the State of Texas (In Re: Yellowjacket Oilfield Services, 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.

Bluebook
In Re: Yellowjacket Oilfield Services, LLC v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Opinion issued November 14, 2023

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-23-00674-CV ——————————— IN RE YELLOWJACKET OILFIELD SERVICES, LLC, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Yellowjacket Oilfield Services LLC, has filed a petition for a writ of

mandamus, challenging the trial court’s August 11, 2023 order denying its Motion

for New Trial and to Vacate the Partial and Interlocutory Default Judgment.1

1 The underlying case is Latoria Lynn Harlan, as Next Friend of D.A.H.J., a Minor Child, Ronald D. Lee, as Representative of The Estate Of Diamond Jarvis Jefferson, Deceased, and Timothy Holbert v. Lone Star Well Service, LLC, Point Energy Partners Operating, LLC, Allegiance Crane & Equipment LLC, Yellowjacket Oilfield Services, LLC, Graco Fishing & Rental Tools, Inc., Crescent Consulting, LLC, Rig Works, Inc., and Consolidated Wellsite Services, LLC, Cause No. Relator has now filed a Motion to Dismiss its petition for writ of mandamus,

stating that the trial court “has set aside the [August 11, 2023] [o]rder that [wa]s the

basis of [its] petition for writ of mandamus . . . [a]nd [a]s a result, [its] petition is

moot.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). Relator’s motion does not include a certificate

of conference, but more than ten days have passed since the motion was filed, and

no party has opposed the relief requested in the motion.2 See TEX. R. APP. P.

10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a)(2).

Accordingly, we grant relator’s motion and dismiss the petition for writ of

mandamus. We dismiss any other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Countiss, and Farris.

2023-02980, in the 295th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Donna Roth presiding. 2 Although relator titled its motion, “Agreed Motion to Dismiss Petition for Writ of Mandamus,” the motion is not signed by real parties in interest and does not include a certificate of conference stating that real parties in interest are unopposed to the relief sought in the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5).

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: Yellowjacket Oilfield Services, LLC v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-yellowjacket-oilfield-services-llc-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.