Mark Polansky and Landrah Polansky v. Pezhman Berenji and John Berenjy
This text of Mark Polansky and Landrah Polansky v. Pezhman Berenji and John Berenjy (Mark Polansky and Landrah Polansky v. Pezhman Berenji and John Berenjy) 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.
Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-11-00592-CV
Mark Polansky and Landrah Polansky, Appellants
v.
Pezhman Berenji and John Berenjy, Appellees
FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 4 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY
NO. 10-1472-CC4, HONORABLE JOHN MCMASTER, JUDGE PRESIDING
C O N C U R R I N G O P I N I O N
I agree with the majority that the trial court erred in purporting to grant summary judgment for appellees as to the Polanskys' claims because the merits of those claims had previously been rendered moot by their nonsuit. Also, because no evidence supported the attorney's fee award against the Polanskys, I agree that appellees must take nothing on that claim.
For these reasons, I concur in the judgment.
__________________________________________
Bob Pemberton, Justice
Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton and Henson
Filed: December 7, 2012
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Mark Polansky and Landrah Polansky v. Pezhman Berenji and John Berenjy, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mark-polansky-and-landrah-polansky-v-pezhman-beren-texapp-2012.