Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2003

Don Pendergrass v. Julius Lowenberg D/B/A Julius Lowenberg Construction

Don Pendergrass v. Julius Lowenberg D/B/A Julius Lowenberg Construction
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided July 29, 2003

Don Pendergrass v. Julius Lowenberg D/B/A Julius Lowenberg Construction

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

 

DON PENDERGRASS,                                       )

                                                                              )             No.  08-03-00132-CV

Appellant,                          )

                                                                              )                 Appeal from the

v.                                                                           )

                                                                              )              327th District Court

JULIUS LOWENBERG d/b/a JULIUS                 )

LOWENBERG CONSTRUCTION,                     )         of El Paso County, Texas

                                                                              )

Appellee.                           )               (TC# 2001-4014)

                                                                              )

 

 

MEMORANDUM   OPINION

 

Pending before the Court is a joint motion to dismiss this appeal and a motion by Appellant=s attorney, Daniel Malone, to withdraw as counsel.

Tex.R.App.P. 42.1(a)(2)(A) states:

(a)        On Motion or By Agreement.  The appellate court may dispose of an appeal as follows:

 

                                                              .               .               .

 

(2)        By Agreement.  In accordance with an agreement signed by the parties or their attorneys and filed with the clerk, the court may:

 

(A)       render judgment effectuating the parties= agreements . . . .

 

Tex.R.App.P. 42.1(a)(2)(A).  The parties have complied with the requirements of


Rule 42.1(a)(2).  The Court has considered this cause on the parties= motion and concludes the motion should be granted and the appeal should be dismissed.  We therefore dismiss the appeal with prejudice as to all parties and order all costs be paid by the Appellant.  See Tex.R.App.P. 42.1(d).  Accordingly, we also deny Mr. Malone=s motion as moot.

 

 

 

July 29, 2003

DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Justice

 

Before Panel No. 3

Barajas, C.J., Larsen, and Chew, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.