in the Interest of D. C., a Child

Opinion

NUMBER 13-15-00486-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG IN THE INTEREST OF D. C., A CHILD

On Motion for Reconsideration of Order of Abatement and Motion to Reinstate Appeal.

ORDER OF REINSTATEMENT

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza Order Per Curiam

On April 29, 2016, the Court abated this appeal and ordered the parties to mediation. Appellant has filed a “Motion for Reconsideration of Order of Abatement and Motion to Reinstate Appeal” which notes that the parties have not been able to agree on a mediator.

Having fully reviewed appellant’s motions, we find that the motion to reconsider the order of abatement should be denied,1 but the motion to reinstate the appeal should

1 In his motion, appellant asserts that statutory construction is the “key issue in this appeal” and

2

be granted in light of the fact that the parties cannot agree on a mediator. Accordingly, we hereby DENY the motion to reconsider the order of abatement, and we REINSTATE the appeal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 23rd day of May, 2016.

that issues of statutory construction “cannot be mediated as a matter of law.” In support of this argument, appellant cites several cases for the well-settled proposition that matters of statutory construction are questions of law for the court to decide, rather than questions of fact. See, e.g., Johnson v. City of Fort Worth, 774 S.W.2d 653, 656 (Tex. 1989); Salinas v. Dimas, 310 S.W.3d 106, 108 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2010, pet. denied). Appellant does not, however, cite any authority establishing that questions of law cannot be mediated, and we find none.