| Leagle, Inc. is dedicated to making legal content and the knowledge contained therein more accessible and discoverable than ever before – anytime, anywhere, for anyone, through innovative, relevant web-based and mobile-media solutions. |
|
© Leagle, Inc. The Leagle.com website is intended to inform and keep readers abreast of developments in the law. It is not to be used or relied upon as a substitute for professional advice. Before acting on any legal matter, readers should discuss the situation with their own professional advisers. For further information, please see our Terms of Use. |
- U.S. v. Arizona (Re: Immigration law) (See related news)
- Alliance for Wild Rockies v. Cottrell (Re: Injunction for timber salvage sale)
- In re: Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation
- State v. Jeffs (Re: Polygamist leader Warren Jeffs) (See related news)
- Antoninetti v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. (Re: Accomodating a customer's disability)
- Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade v. City of New York (Re: NYC policy on taxicab owners buying fuel-efficient hybrids)
- Sanofi-Aventis v. FDA (Re: Licensing of the anit-cancer drug oxaliplatin marketed as Eloxatin)
- Ostergren v. Cuccinelli (Re: Virginia's privacy act and publishing Social Security numbers online)
- Voices v. Chu (Re: Environmental consequences of 'clean coal' tax credits)
- USA v. Caracappa (Re: RICO convictions of NYPD 'Mafia Cops') (See related news)
- Mattel, Inc. v. MGA Entertainment, Inc. (Re: Bratz dolls copyright case) (See related news)
- Wine Country Gift Baskets.com v. Steen (Re: Home delivery of wine in Texas)
- State v. McGuire (Re: Sexual abuse conviction of a former Jesuit priest) (See related news)
- Wisconsin Medical Society, Inc. v. Morgan (Re: Malpractice fund used for state budget) (See related news)
- Ralphs Grocery Co. v. United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 8 (Re: Court on picketing by a union)
BADALICH v. AMERICAN FIDELITY & LIBERTY INSURANCE COMPANY
CARL FRANCIS BADALICH AND CARL F. BADALICH & ASSOCIATES, Appellants,
v.
AMERICAN FIDELITY & LIBERTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
No. 13-09-00144-CV.
Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi.
Delivered and filed February 11, 2010.
Before Chief Justice VALDEZ and Justices YAÑEZ and VELA.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Appellants perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 148th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 04-7211-E. Appellants have filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal on grounds that the appellants no longer wish to pursue this appeal. Appellants request that this Court dismiss the appeal.
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. 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.
This copy provided by Leagle, Inc.
| x | |





