MARSH USA, INC. (DELAWARE) AND MARSH USA, INC. (TEXAS) v. FILBERTO ATKINSON--Appeal from 94th District Court of Nueces County

Annotate this Case

NUMBERS

13-05-750-CV

13-06-015-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_______________________________________________________

MARSH USA, INC. (DELAWARE) AND

  MARSH USA, INC. (TEXAS), Appellants,

v.

FILBERTO ATKINSON, Appellee.

_______________________________________________________

On appeal from the 94th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

_______________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

  Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Ya ez

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

 

Appellants, MARSH USA, INC. (DELAWARE) AND MARSH USA, INC. (TEXAS), ET AL., perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 94th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 05-04515-C. After the clerk=s record was filed, appellants, MARSH USA, INC. (DELAWARE) AND MARSH USA, INC. (TEXAS), filed a motion to dismiss their appeal against appellee, FILBERTO ATKINSON. Appellants state that they no longer wish to prosecute their appeal against appellee, FILBERTO ATKINSON. The appeal of appellants, MARSH USA, INC. (DELAWARE) AND MARSH USA, INC. (TEXAS), and appellee, FILBERTO ATKINSON, is severed from the original appeal and is docketed under cause number 13-06-015-CV.

Having considered appellants=s motion to dismiss the appeal and the documents on file, this Court is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. The motion to dismiss the appeal of appellants, MARSH USA, INC. (DELAWARE) AND MARSH USA, INC. (TEXAS), and appellee, FILBERTO ATKINSON, is hereby granted. The appeal of appellants, MARSH USA, INC. (DELAWARE) AND MARSH USA, INC. (TEXAS), and appellee, FILBERTO ATKINSON, in cause number 13-06-015-CV is ordered DISMISSED.

The remaining issues in the appeal will remain docketed under cause number 13-05-750-CV.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 26th day of January, 2006.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.