LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION v. JEFF SNYDER, AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JAMES R. SNYDER, AND AS THE REPRESENTATIVE, SHAREHOLDER AND DIRECTOR OF BEACH VIEW ESTATES, INC., ON BEHALF OF BEACH VIEW ESTATES, INC., AND THE ESTATE OF JAMES R. SNYDER, JEFFREY C. FRAHM AND KATHLEEN M. FRAHM--Appeal from County Court at Law No 3 of Nueces County (per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBERS 13-10-00536-CV 13-10-00537-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION, APPELLANT, v. JEFF SNYDER, AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JAMES R. SNYDER, AND AS THE REPRESENTATIVE, SHAREHOLDER AND DIRECTOR OF BEACH VIEW ESTATES, INC., ON BEHALF OF BEACH VIEW ESTATES, INC., AND THE ESTATE OF JAMES R. SNYDER, JEFFREY C. FRAHM AND KATHLEEN M. FRAHM, APPELLEES. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Benavides Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, Lawyers Title Insurance Company, perfected appeals from judgments entered by the County Court at Law No. 3 of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 02-62076-3. Appellant has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeals on grounds that appellant no longer wishes to prosecute the appeals. Appellant requests that this Court dismiss the appeals. The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant=s unopposed motion to dismiss the appeals, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). Appellant=s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeals are hereby DISMISSED. In accordance with the agreement of the parties, costs are taxed against the party incurring same. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Having dismissed the appeals at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandates will issue forthwith. Any pending motions are dismissed as moot. PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 6th day of October, 2011. 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.
