Union Pacific Railroad v. Torres

Court of Appeals of Texas

Union Pacific Railroad v. Torres

233 S.W.3d 523, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 6567, 2007 WL 2380373

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedAugust 16, 2007

Docket08-06-00023-CV

StatusPublished

This text of 233 S.W.3d 523 (Union Pacific Railroad v. Torres) 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

Union Pacific Railroad v. Torres, 233 S.W.3d 523, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 6567, 2007 WL 2380373 (Tex. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

KENNETH R. CARR, Justice.

Pending before the Court is a Joint Motion to Abate the Appeal, in which the parties requested that the Court abate the appeal pending the execution of a final settlement agreement. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(C). The Court, having received notice that the parties have executed a final settlement, is of the opinion that the motion is now moot.

Also pending before the Court is a Joint Motion to Vacate Judgment Pursuant to Settlement. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B). The parties represent to the Court that they have achieved a voluntary resolution and settlement of the underlying case and request that the Court: (a) vacate the judgment of the trial court without reference to the merits; (b) remand the case to the trial court for entry of a take-nothing judgment pursuant to settlement; and (c) command that each *524 party bear its own court and litigation costs.

Having considered both motions, we grant the Joint Motion to Vacate Judgment Pursuant to Settlement, and deny the Motion to Abate the Appeal. See Tex. R.App. P. 42.1(a)(2). The trial court’s judgment is therefore vacated and the case remanded for further action in accordance with the parties’ settlement agreement pursuant to Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B). The Motion to Abate the Appeal is denied as moot. Costs are taxed against the party incurring the same, pursuant to the parties’ agreement. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(d).

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

OPINION

KENNETH R. CARR, Justice.

Pending before the Court is a Joint Motion to Abate the Appeal, in which the parties requested that the Court abate the appeal pending the execution of a final settlement agreement. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(C). The Court, having received notice that the parties have executed a final settlement, is of the opinion that the motion is now moot.

Also pending before the Court is a Joint Motion to Vacate Judgment Pursuant to Settlement. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B). The parties represent to the Court that they have achieved a voluntary resolution and settlement of the underlying case and request that the Court: (a) vacate the judgment of the trial court without reference to the merits; (b) remand the case to the trial court for entry of a take-nothing judgment pursuant to settlement; and (c) command that each *524 party bear its own court and litigation costs.

Having considered both motions, we grant the Joint Motion to Vacate Judgment Pursuant to Settlement, and deny the Motion to Abate the Appeal. See Tex. R.App. P. 42.1(a)(2). The trial court’s judgment is therefore vacated and the case remanded for further action in accordance with the parties’ settlement agreement pursuant to Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B). The Motion to Abate the Appeal is denied as moot. Costs are taxed against the party incurring the same, pursuant to the parties’ agreement. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.1(d).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 S.W.3d 523, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 6567, 2007 WL 2380373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/union-pacific-railroad-v-torres-texapp-2007.