Ruby Lucille Hall v. RDSL Enterprises LLC D/B/A Jack in the Box
This text of Ruby Lucille Hall v. RDSL Enterprises LLC D/B/A Jack in the Box (Ruby Lucille Hall v. RDSL Enterprises LLC D/B/A Jack in the Box) 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
|
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH |
NO. 02-12-00363-CV
|
Ruby Lucille Hall |
APPELLANT |
|
|
V. |
||
|
RDSL Enterprises LLC d/b/a Jack in the Box, and Jack in the Box, Inc. |
APPELLEES |
|
------------
FROM THE 141st District Court OF Tarrant COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION[1] AND JUDGMENT
We have considered “Appellant's Motion To Dismiss All Claims Against Jack In The Box, Inc.” It is the court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the appeal against Jack in the Box, Inc. only. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f). This case shall hereafter be styled Ruby Lucille Hall v. RDSL Enterprises LLC d/b/a Jack in the Box.
Costs of the appeal shall be paid by appellant, for which let execution issue. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d).
PER CURIAM
PANEL: MEIER, GARDNER, and GABRIEL, JJ.
DELIVERED: February 14, 2013
[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ruby Lucille Hall v. RDSL Enterprises LLC D/B/A Jack in the Box, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ruby-lucille-hall-v-rdsl-enterprises-llc-dba-jack--texapp-2013.