Roel Pena and Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Angel Eliseo Chacon and Sheila Mordan, Individually and as Next Friends of Destiny Nicole Chacon, A Minor--Appeal from 139th District Court of Hidalgo County

Annotate this Case
/**/

NUMBER 13-05-749-CV

 

COURT OF APPEALS

 

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

________________________________________________________

 

ROEL PENA AND AVENTIS PHARMACEUTICALS,

INC., Appellants,

 

v.

 

ANGEL ELISEO CHACON AND SHEILA MORDAN,

INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIENDS OF DESTINY

NICOLE CHACON, A MINOR, Appellees.

________________________________________________________

 

On appeal from the 139th District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

________________________________________________________

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Ya ez and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

 

Appellants, ROEL PENA AND AVENTIS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 139th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-750-04-C. After the record was filed, the parties filed a joint motion to set aside the trial court s judgment and remand the cause pursuant to settlement agreement. In the motion, the parties state that they have agreed to a compromise settlement of the controversy on which the trial court s judgment is based, and the appeal is therefore moot. The parties request that the trial court s judgment be set aside without regard to the merits and that the cause be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings and disposition in accordance with their agreement.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file and the parties joint motion, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. The joint motion is granted, and the judgment of the trial court is hereby REVERSED and the cause is REMANDED to the trial court in accordance with the parties settlement agreement.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 28th day of September, 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.