Gaurav Mishra v. Shilpa Mishra Appeal from 219th Judicial District Court of Collin County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISMISS and Opinion Filed September 20, 2018 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-01386-CV GAURAV MISHRA, Appellant V. SHILPA MISHRA, Appellee On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219-55658-2017 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Stoddart, Whitehill, and Boatright Opinion by Justice Whitehill Appellant appeals from the trial court’s protective order signed on November 8, 2017. On August 29, 2018, a supplemental clerk’s record was filed containing the trial court’s order vacating as void the November 8 protective order. In response, the Court instructed appellant to file a letter brief explaining how the appeal is not now moot or, alternatively a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n v. Jones, 1 S.W.3d 83, 86 (Tex. 1999) (case becomes moot and court loses jurisdiction if controversy between parties ceases to exist). Before the Court is appellant’s unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal and vacate the appealed protective order. Because the protective order has already been vacated, we grant the motion to the extent that we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). /Bill Whitehill/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE 171386F.P05 S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT GAURAV MISHRA, Appellant No. 05-17-01386-CV On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219-55658-2017. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. Justices Stoddart and Boatright participating. V. SHILPA MISHRA, Appellee In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. It is ORDERED that appellee SHILPA MISHRA recover her costs of this appeal from appellant GAURAV MISHRA. Judgment entered September 20, 2018. –3–

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.