REVERSE and REMAND; Opinion Filed June 25, 2014.

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-13-01220-CV

MAC 23, INC. AND ARCABABA, INC., Appellants

V.

STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee

On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-10-12179

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Bridges, Francis, and Lang-Miers 

Opinion by Justice Bridges

Appellants Mac 23, Inc. and Arcababa, Inc. appeal from the trial court’s turnover order 

and order appointing receiver. In four issues, appellants contend the order: (1) is void because it 

granted mandatory injunctive relief without strict compliance with the rules and statutes; (2) is 

void because no evidence supported it; (3) should be reversed because it set the receiver’s fee 

without the benefit of evidence; and (4) should be reversed because it seeks turnover of 

information not subject to disclosure. For the reasons set for in this opinion, we reverse and 

remand.

Appellee Steadfast Insurance Company entered into an agreed judgment with appellants

and others1 on July 12, 2011. Appellee later filed an application for turnover and appointment of 

 1 The other parties are not before this Court.
–2–

a receiver in aid of judgment (“Application”). Appellee acknowledges that it failed to provide 

appellants with a copy of the Application. The Application was set for hearing on August 14, 

2013. Appellee concedes notice of the hearing was sent to an incorrect party and not to 

appellants. On the date of the hearing, appellee appeared ex parte and presented the Application 

to the trial court. The trial court signed the order granting turnover and appointment of receiver 

on the same day as the hearing and issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law on 

September 13, 2013.

In its first issue, appellants argue the trial court erred because they received no notice. In 

its brief on appeal, appellee acknowledges that, even though the Application and notice of 

hearing represented to the trial court that appellants had been given notice by appellee, appellee 

failed to provide notice to appellants. Appellee, therefore, asks this Court to set aside the 

turnover order and appointment of receiver for failure to provide notice as represented to the trial 

court.

In light of this concession, we reverse the order of the trial court and remand for further 

proceedings. TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2. We need not address appellant’s other issues.

131220F.P05

/David L. Bridges/

DAVID L. BRIDGES

JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

MAC 23, INC. AND ARCABABA, INC., 

Appellants

No. 05-13-01220-CV V.

STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPANY, 

Appellee

On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-10-12179.

Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. 

Justices Francis and Lang-Miers 

participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

REVERSED and this cause is REMANDED to the trial court for further proceedings.

It is ORDERED that appellants MAC 23, INC. AND ARCABABA, INC. recover their 

costs of this appeal from appellee STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPANY.

Judgment entered this 25th day of June, 2014.

/David L. Bridges/

DAVID L. BRIDGES

JUSTICE