The City of Alamo, Luciano Ozuna Jr., Roberto De La Garza, and Diana Martinez v. Baudelio Castillo Appeal from 275th District Court of Hidalgo County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-19-00038-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ THE CITY OF ALAMO, LUCIANO OZUNA, JR., ROBERTO DE LA GARZA AND DIANA MARTINEZ, Appellants, v. BAUDELIO CASTILLO, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 275th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Hinojosa Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa Appellants have filed an interlocutory appeal of the trial court’s granting of a temporary injunction. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(4). Currently before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to dismiss the appeal as moot. In their joint motion to dismiss, the parties represent that the trial court has since granted appellants’ plea to the jurisdiction, dismissing all of appellee’s claims. The parties therefore urge the Court to dismiss the appeal as moot. See Hernandez v. Ebrom, 289 S.W.3d 316, 319 (Tex. 2009) (“Appeals of some interlocutory orders become moot because the orders have been rendered moot by subsequent orders.”). The Court, having considered the documents on file and the motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. Appellants shall bear the costs of this appeal. See id. R. 42.1(d). Having dismissed the appeal at the parties’ request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith. Appellants’ motion to submit the case for consideration is dismissed as moot. LETICIA HINOJOSA Justice Delivered and filed the 30th day of May, 2019. 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.
