Court Opinion

ID: 9949337
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-11 14:11:26.968327+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:42.173284
License: Public Domain

Opinion issued March 7, 2024

                                      In The

                              Court of Appeals
                                     For The

                          First District of Texas
                            ————————————
                              NO. 01-23-00934-CV
                           ———————————
           IN RE FOUR OAKS PLACE OPERATING, LP, Relator

            Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Relator, Four Oaks Place Operating, LP, filed a petition for writ of mandamus

challenging the trial court’s November 27, 2023 order granting the “Amended

Motion to Quash Jury Demand and Payment of Jury Fee” filed by real party in

interest, David Allen.1 In its mandamus petition, relator requested that the Court

issue a writ of mandamus directing the trial court to “vacate its November 27, 2023

[o]rder granting Allen’s motion to quash [relator’s] jury demand.”

1
      The underlying case is David Allen v. Four Oaks Place Operating, LP, Cause No.
      2020-81924, in the 295th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable
      Donna Roth presiding.
      On January 11, 2024, the parties filed a “Joint Notice of Settlement and

Motion to Abate Deadlines.” In the motion, the parties notified the Court that they

had “recently reached an agreement that would resolve the case” and requested that

the original proceeding be abated to allow for “finalizing the terms of the settlement

and [to] prepar[e] the necessary settlement documents.” On January 18, 2024, the

Court granted the parties’ motion and abated this original proceeding.

      On February 27, 2024, relator filed a “Motion to Dismiss Original

Proceeding.” In the motion, relator stated that the parties had “finalized the relevant

settlement documents, which renders pursuit of this [original proceeding]

unnecessary.” Accordingly, relator requested that the “Court dismiss this mandamus

proceeding.”

      Relator’s motion includes a certificate of conference stating that real party in

interest is agreed to the relief requested in the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5),

10.3(a)(2).

      Accordingly, we reinstate this original proceeding on the Court’s active

docket, grant relator’s motion, and dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus. We

dismiss any pending motions as moot.

                                   PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Farris.

                                           2