Shah Eye Center, P. A. and Dr. Pankajkumar G. Shah v. Blanca M. Montoya

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 28, 2013
Docket13-12-00765-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Shah Eye Center, P. A. and Dr. Pankajkumar G. Shah v. Blanca M. Montoya (Shah Eye Center, P. A. and Dr. Pankajkumar G. Shah v. Blanca M. Montoya) 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
Shah Eye Center, P. A. and Dr. Pankajkumar G. Shah v. Blanca M. Montoya, (Tex. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-12-00765-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

SHAH EYE CENTER, P. A. AND DR. PANKAJKUMAR G. SHAH, Appellants,

v.

BLANCA M. MONTOYA, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Longoria Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants filed an appeal from a judgment entered by the 332nd District Court of

Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-1265-10-F. Appellants have filed an

unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal on grounds that the parties have resolved their differences by reaching an agreement and no longer desire to pursue their appeal.

Appellants request that this Court dismiss the appeal with prejudice.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellants’ unopposed

motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). Appellants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and the appeal is

hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In accordance with the agreement of the

parties, costs are taxed against the party incurring same. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d)

("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant.").

Having dismissed the appeal at appellants’ request, no motion for rehearing will be

entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 28th day of February, 2013.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Shah Eye Center, P. A. and Dr. Pankajkumar G. Shah v. Blanca M. Montoya, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shah-eye-center-p-a-and-dr-pankajkumar-g-shah-v-bl-texapp-2013.