Broyhill Furniture Industries v. Randy Murphy and Dave Shaffer Appeal from 44th Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Dismissed and Opinion Filed July 21, 2021 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-11-01545-CV BROYHILL FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, Appellant V. RANDY MURPHY AND DAVE SHAFFER, Appellees On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 08-13276 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Partida-Kipness, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness We reinstate this appeal. In 2013, we abated this case due to Broyhill Furniture Industries’ bankruptcy. See TEX. R. APP. P. 8.2. The Court conducted an independent review of the federal Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system, which does not show a pending bankruptcy case associated with this appeal. We notified the parties by letter, requesting they inform the Court of the status of the bankruptcy and of this appeal. We cautioned that the failure to respond would result in the appeal being dismissed for want of prosecution. See id. 42.3(b),(c). To date, neither party has responded. Because we gave the parties an opportunity to show why we should not dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and no one responded, we dismiss this appeal. See id. 42.3(b),(c); Brewer v. Admiral Ins. Co., 2002 WL 31312990, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 16, 2002, no writ) (per curiam) (not designated for publication). 111545f.p05 /Robbie Partida-Kipness/ ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS JUSTICE –2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT BROYHILL FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, Appellant No. 05-11-01545-CV On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 08-13276. Opinion delivered by Justice PartidaKipness. Justices Myers and Garcia participating. V. RANDY MURPHY AND DAVE SHAFFER, Appellees In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. Judgment entered this 21st day of July, 2021. –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.