Court Opinion

ID: 2923311
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 03:29:08.297569+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:20.904260
License: Public Domain

NUMBER
13-05-504-CV
 
                         COURT
OF APPEALS
 
               THIRTEENTH
DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                  CORPUS
CHRISTI - EDINBURG 
_________________________________________________________
 
DIANA BRANNON AND CLINT WRIGHT,         Appellants,
 
                                           v.
 
MONIQUE TRIGO AND ESTRENANDO ENTERPRISES,
INC.,                                                                     Appellees.
_________________________________________________________
 
                On
appeal from County Court at Law No. 4
                           of
Hidalgo County, Texas.
_________________________________________________________
 
                     MEMORANDUM
OPINION
 
                 Before
Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza
Memorandum
Opinion Per Curiam
 

Appellants, DIANA BRANNON, ET AL., perfected an appeal
from a judgment entered by County Court at Law No. 4 of Hidalgo County, Texas,
in cause number CL-05-0685-D. 
After the record and briefs were filed, appellee, Monique Trigo, filed a
motion to dismiss the appeal.  In her
motion, appellee states that she has constructively tendered ownership of the
company, Estrenando Enterprises, Inc., 
to appellants and that such development has rendered this appeal
moot.  Appellee states that, since
appellants now own the company, no live controversy exists.  By notice dated March 22, 2006,  this Court requested that appellants file a
response to appellee=s motion.  Appellants failed to file a response as
requested by this Court.  Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 42.3, notice was given
that, unless a response to appellee=s motion was filed
within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court=s notice, the appeal
would be dismissed. To date, appellants have failed to respond to this Court=s notice. 
The Court, having considered the documents on file, appellee=s motion to dismiss
the appeal, and appellants= failure to respond to
this Court=s notice, is of the
opinion that the appeal should be dismissed in its entirety.  Appellee=s motion to dismiss
the appeal is granted, and the appeal between appellants and appellee, Monique
Trigo, is DISMISSED.  On the Court=s own motion and
pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 42.3,
the appeal is DISMISSED in its entirety. 

PER CURIAM
Memorandum Opinion
delivered and filed this
the 1st
day of June, 2006.