Mirthala Castaneda Martinez v. H. Hollis Rankin, Iii

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 8, 2006
Docket13-06-00071-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Mirthala Castaneda Martinez v. H. Hollis Rankin, Iii (Mirthala Castaneda Martinez v. H. Hollis Rankin, Iii) 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
Mirthala Castaneda Martinez v. H. Hollis Rankin, Iii, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

                             NUMBER 13-06-071-CV

                         COURT OF APPEALS

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

MIRTHALA CASTANEDA MARTINEZ,                           Appellant,

                                           v.

H. HOLLIS RANKIN, III,                                              Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

                 On appeal from the 332nd  District Court

                           of Hidalgo County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Before Justices Rodriguez, Castillo, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam


Appellant, MIRTHALA CASTANEDA MARTINEZ, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-771-04-F(1).  After the record was filed and after the cause was referred to mediation, the parties filed a joint motion to dismiss the appeal.  In the motion, the parties state that this case has been resolved and appellant no longer wishes to prosecute this appeal.  The parties request that this Court dismiss the appeal and that costs be borne by the party incurring same.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and the joint motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted.  The joint motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this

the 8th day of June, 2006.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mirthala Castaneda Martinez v. H. Hollis Rankin, Iii, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mirthala-castaneda-martinez-v-h-hollis-rankin-iii-texapp-2006.