Brazos Presbyterian Homes, Inc. d/b/a The Hallmark v. August Schumacher Lander, as Independent Executor of the Estate of Betty S. Lander, Deceased Appeal from 152nd District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Joint Motion to Dismiss Granted; Appellee’s Motion for Rehearing Denied as Moot; Majority and Concurring Memorandum Opinions issued February 10, 2015, Withdrawn; Judgment issued February 10, 2015, Vacated; Appeal Dismissed; and Substitute Memorandum Opinion filed April 21, 2015. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-14-00478-CV BRAZOS PRESBYTERIAN HOMES, INC. D/B/A THE HALLMARK, Appellant V. AUGUST SCHUMACHER LANDER, AS INDEPENDENT EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF BETTY S. LANDER, DECEASED, Appellee On Appeal from the 152nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2013-65993 SUBSTITUTE MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an accelerated appeal from an interlocutory order signed May 30, 2014, denying appellant’s motion to dismiss the underlying suit for failure to file an expert report under Section 74.351 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 74.351 (West Supp. 2014). On February 10, 2015, this court issued its Majority and Concurring Memorandum Opinions. On March 12, 2015, appellee filed a motion for rehearing. On April 13, 2015, the parties filed a joint motion to dismiss the appeal because they have settled their dispute. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. We grant the parties’ joint motion to dismiss. We deny appellee’s motion for rehearing as moot. We order this court’s Majority and Concurring Memorandum Opinions issued February 10, 2015, withdrawn, and issue this per curiam opinion in their stead. This court’s judgment dated February 10, 2015, is vacated, and a new judgment is issued with this per curiam opinion ordering that each party shall bear its own costs of this appeal. The appeal is ordered dismissed. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Boyce, McCally, and Brown. 2

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.