Michelle D. Martz, D.C. and Trinity Wellness Center, P.C. AND Eric Hale and...
Michelle D. Martz, D.C. and Trinity Wellness Center, P.C. AND Eric Hale and...
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 2-08-388-CV
MICHELLE D. MARTZ, D.C. AND APPELLANTS
TRINITY WELLNESS CENTER, P.C. AND APPELLEES
V.
ERIC HALE AND MARGARET HALE APPELLEES
AND APPELLANTS
----------
FROM THE 362nd DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION[1] AND JUDGMENT
----------
We have considered the parties= AAgreement Regarding Disposition Of Appeals,@ which we construe to be a motion for disposition. It is the court=s opinion that the motion should be granted in part and denied in part.[2] Accordingly, without regard to the merits, we vacate the trial court=s judgment and remand the case to the trial court for rendition of a judgment in accordance with the parties= settlement agreement.[3]
Costs of the appeal shall be paid by the party incurring the same, for which let execution issue.[4]
PER CURIAM
PANEL: CAYCE, C.J.; LIVINGSTON and DAUPHINOT, JJ.
DELIVERED: April 23, 2009
[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
[2]The parties ask us to render a judgment affirming in part and setting aside in part. We cannot do both. Rule 42.1(a)(2) permits us only to either render judgment effectuating the parties= agreements or set aside the trial court=s judgment and remand the case to the trial court for rendition of judgment in accordance with the agreement. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(A), (B); Cunningham v. Cunningham, 2-08-362-CV, 2008 WL 5479677, at *1 (Tex. App.CFort Worth Oct. 30, 2008, no pet.) (memo op.).
[3]See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B), 43.2(d); Innovative Office Sys., Inc. v. Johnson, 911 S.W.2d 387, 388 (Tex. 1995).
[4]See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.