Williamsburg Care Company L.P. D/B/A Princeton Place Rehabilitation and Healthcare v. Sylvia Soto, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Narcisa Dimas, Ruby Buentello, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Manuel Riojas Munoz, and Adela Barboza, Individually

Court of Appeals of Texas

Williamsburg Care Company L.P. D/B/A Princeton Place Rehabilitation and Healthcare v. Sylvia Soto, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Narcisa Dimas, Ruby Buentello, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Manuel Riojas Munoz, and Adela Barboza, Individually

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided March 4, 2014·No. 04-13-00822-CV·Published

Opinion

Sylvia Soto, Individually and as Representative of the Estate

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas March 4, 2014

No. 04-13-00822-CV

WILLIAMSBURG CARE COMPANY L.P. d/b/a Princeton Place Rehabilitation and Healthcare, Appellant

v.

Sylvia SOTO, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Narcisa Dimas, Deceased, Ruby Buentello, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Manuel Riojas Munoz, Deceased, and Adela Barboza, Individually, Appellees

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013-CI-05792 Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding

ORDER Appellant has filed a motion to abate this appeal because one of the issues presented in the appeal is the same issue pending in petitions for review filed in Williamsburg Care Co. L.P. v. Acosta, 406 S.W.3d 711 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed), Fredericksburg Care Co. L.P. v. Lira, 407 S.W.3d 810 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed), and Fredericksburg Care Co. L.P. v. Perez, 406 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed). This court has considered the motion, the appellees’ response, and the appellant’s reply to the appellees’ response. In light of the pending higher court review of the precedent previously established by this court, the court has determined that abating this appeal pending the Texas Supreme Court’s resolution of the issue will likely achieve the greatest judicial efficiency. Accordingly, appellant’s motion to abate is GRANTED. For administrative purposes, this appeal will be treated as a closed case, unless and until appellant files a motion requesting its reinstatement following the Texas Supreme Court’s resolution of the issue.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 4th day of March, 2014.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court

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

Sylvia Soto, Individually and as Representative of the Estate

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas March 4, 2014

No. 04-13-00822-CV

WILLIAMSBURG CARE COMPANY L.P. d/b/a Princeton Place Rehabilitation and Healthcare, Appellant

v.

Sylvia SOTO, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Narcisa Dimas, Deceased, Ruby Buentello, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Manuel Riojas Munoz, Deceased, and Adela Barboza, Individually, Appellees

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013-CI-05792 Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding

ORDER Appellant has filed a motion to abate this appeal because one of the issues presented in the appeal is the same issue pending in petitions for review filed in Williamsburg Care Co. L.P. v. Acosta, 406 S.W.3d 711 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed), Fredericksburg Care Co. L.P. v. Lira, 407 S.W.3d 810 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed), and Fredericksburg Care Co. L.P. v. Perez, 406 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed). This court has considered the motion, the appellees’ response, and the appellant’s reply to the appellees’ response. In light of the pending higher court review of the precedent previously established by this court, the court has determined that abating this appeal pending the Texas Supreme Court’s resolution of the issue will likely achieve the greatest judicial efficiency. Accordingly, appellant’s motion to abate is GRANTED. For administrative purposes, this appeal will be treated as a closed case, unless and until appellant files a motion requesting its reinstatement following the Texas Supreme Court’s resolution of the issue.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 4th day of March, 2014.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court

Williamsburg Care Company L.P. D/B/A Princeton Place Rehabilitation and Healthcare v. Sylvia Soto, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Narcisa Dimas, Ruby Buentello, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Manuel Riojas Munoz, and Adela Barboza, Individually, (Tex. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Williamsburg Care Company L.P. D/B/A Princeton Place Rehabilitation and Healthcare v. Sylvia Soto, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Narcisa Dimas, Ruby Buentello, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Manuel Riojas Munoz, and Adela Barboza, Individually (Williamsburg Care Company L.P. D/B/A Princeton Place Rehabilitation and Healthcare v. Sylvia Soto, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Narcisa Dimas, Ruby Buentello, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Manuel Riojas Munoz, and Adela Barboza, Individually) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related