SCOGGINS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. v. HECTOR G. LEAL AND SAN BENITO CONSOLIDATED INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT--Appeal from 107th District Court of Cameron County
Annotate this CaseTHIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
________________________________________________________
NUMBER 13-06-415-CVSCOGGINS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., Appellant,
v.
HECTOR G. LEAL AND SAN BENITO INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellees.
_______________________________________________________
On appeal from the 107th District Court
of Cameron County, Texas.
________________________________________________________
NUMBER 13-06-492-CV
IN RE SCOGGINS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.
________________________________________________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
_________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Scoggins Construction Company, Inc. sought review of the trial court's denial of its motion to compel arbitration through an interlocutory appeal and a petition for writ of mandamus. The parties have now filed joint motions to vacate and remand in accordance with agreement of the parties. In their motion, the parties request that this Court vacate the trial court's interlocutory order and remand this case for further proceedings in accordance with the agreement of the parties. The parties further requests that costs be taxed against the party incurring same.
The Court, having considered the documents on file and the joint motions to vacate and to remand in accordance with agreement of the parties, is of the opinion that the motions should be granted. The joint motions to vacate and to remand in accordance with agreement of the parties are GRANTED. The trial court's interlocutory order denying motion to compel arbitration is hereby VACATED, and the cause is REMANDED to the trial court in accordance with the agreement of the parties.
PER CURIAM
Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this
the 22nd day of March, 2007.
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.