Brazos Valley Floors & Interiors, Inc. and Harlan King v. Gayle Loyd
Brazos Valley Floors & Interiors, Inc. and Harlan King v. Gayle Loyd
Opinion
IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-98-128-CV
BRAZOS VALLEY FLOORS
& INTERIORS, INC. AND
HARLAN KING,
Appellants
v.
GAYLE LOYD, Appellee
From the 170th District Court
McLennan County, Texas
Trial Court # 97-2260-4
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The defendant-appellants, Brazos Valley Floors & Interiors, Inc. and Harlan King (collectively “Appellants”), sought appellate review of an adverse judgment entered against them in favor of the plaintiff-appellee, Gayle Loyd, in a defamation suit. On August 24, 1998, Appellants filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. In relevant portion, Rule 42.1(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides:
(a) The appellate court may dispose of an appeal as follows:
(2) in accordance with a motion of appellant to dismiss the appeal or affirm the appealed judgment or order; but no other party may be prevented from seeking any relief to which it would otherwise be entitled.
Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2).
Appellants state that the parties have settled their controversy. Appellee Loyd has not filed a response to the motion. Accordingly, this cause is dismissed with costs to be taxed against Appellants.
PER CURIAM
Before Chief Justice Davis,
Justice Cummings, and
Justice Vance
Dismissed on appellants’ motion
Opinion delivered and filed August 31, 1998
Do not publish
lant as open pleas. Brown v. State, 943 S.W.2d 35 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).
The judge assessed punishment within the statutory range of punishment. The judgments are regular on their face and contain all requirements set out in the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, article 42.01.
Appellant's briefs certify that copies were served on Appellant on June 2, 1999. Appellant has filed no pro se briefs and no extension of time in which to file same has been requested.
We have examined both briefs and agree that both appeals are frivolous and without merit, and we find nothing in the record that might arguably support an appeal.
Appellant's appointed counsel has further made a request and motion to withdraw as attorney in each case. Those motions are granted.
Judgments in both cases are affirmed.
FRANK G. McDONALD
Chief Justice (Retired)
Before Chief Justice Davis,
Justice Vance and
Chief Justice McDonald (Retired)
Affirmed
Opinion delivered and filed September 15, 1999
Do not publish
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.