JOE ESPINOZA AND MARIA ESPINOZA, Appellants,

v.

DANIEL M.L. HERNANDEZ, Appellee.

Appellants, Joe Espinoza and Maria Espinoza ("the Espinozas"), appeal from the trial court's order granting summary judgment to appellee, Daniel Hernandez. Hernandez filed a Motion to Dismiss stating that the matter should be dismissed because the underlying judgment had been dismissed in bankruptcy court. ⁽¹⁾ A response was requested. The Espinoza's response stated that they are not oppose to the motion to dismiss.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and the unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a). Appellee's motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellants. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellants."). Having dismissed the appeal at the parties' request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 20th day of August, 2009.

1. In the motion to dismiss, Hernandez states that this Court was advised of the bankruptcy proceeding. No notice of bankruptcy appears in the record.