Osvaldo De La Vega, Oscar De La Vega, Felicitas De La Vega and Alicia De La Vega v. Ashley Imming F/K/A Ashley Corbus

CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)
DecidedMarch 2, 2026
Docket08-25-00065-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Osvaldo De La Vega, Oscar De La Vega, Felicitas De La Vega and Alicia De La Vega v. Ashley Imming F/K/A Ashley Corbus (Osvaldo De La Vega, Oscar De La Vega, Felicitas De La Vega and Alicia De La Vega v. Ashley Imming F/K/A Ashley Corbus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Osvaldo De La Vega, Oscar De La Vega, Felicitas De La Vega and Alicia De La Vega v. Ashley Imming F/K/A Ashley Corbus, (Tex. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS ————————————

No. 08-25-00065-CV ————————————

Osvaldo De La Vega, Oscar De La Vega, Felicitas De La Vega, and Alicia De La Vega, Appellants v. Ashley Imming f/k/a Ashley Corbus, Appellee

On Appeal from County Criminal Court at Law No. 1 El Paso County, Texas Trial Court No. 2024-CCV01090

M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N Appellants have filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal, stating that the parties

have settled their disputes, including this appeal. No other party has filed a notice of appeal and

no opinion has been issued. Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R.

App. P. 42.1(a)(1) (allowing dismissal of appeal on motion of appellant).

Appellants further request that “[t]he $20,000 in cash posted with the El Paso County Clerk

to supersede the judgment . . . be ordered refunded to [A]ppellants by check payable to ‘Lopez

Molinar & Hirsh PLLC in Trust.’” However, such relief falls outside the scope of Rule 42.1(a)(1). See id. (allowing only dismissal of an appeal or affirmance of an appealed judgment or order where

relief is granted based on appellant’s motion); cf. id. 42.1(a)(2) (allowing rendition of judgment

effectuating the parties’ agreement where relief is granted based on agreement signed by the parties

and filed with the clerk). Accordingly, we deny this request. 1

Costs of the appeal are taxed against Appellants. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d). 2 Any other

pending motions are denied as moot.

LISA J. SOTO, Justice

March 2, 2026

Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.

1 Under the circumstances, the trial court is the proper forum in which to make such a request. See Burns v. Bishop, 48 S.W.3d 459, 467 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, no pet.) (“Funds on deposit in the registry of a trial court are always subject to the control and order of the trial court, and the court enjoys great latitude in dealing with them.”). 2 Appellants request that costs be taxed against the party incurring them. Because the motion does not reflect that Appellee agreed to this request, we must tax costs against Appellants. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d) (“Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant.”).

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

Related

Burns v. Bishop
48 S.W.3d 459 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Osvaldo De La Vega, Oscar De La Vega, Felicitas De La Vega and Alicia De La Vega v. Ashley Imming F/K/A Ashley Corbus, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/osvaldo-de-la-vega-oscar-de-la-vega-felicitas-de-la-vega-and-alicia-de-la-txctapp8-2026.