Saeadah Jamil v. Muhammad-Habib Jamil Appeal from 300th District Court of Brazoria County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-20-00348-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG SAEADAH JAMIL, Appellant, v. MUHAMMAD-HABIB JAMIL, Appellee. On appeal from the 300th District Court of Brazoria County, Texas. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria Appellant Saeadah Jamil filed a notice of appeal from an order issued on July 14, 2020, in cause number 102,600-F in the 300th District Court of Brazoria County, Texas. 1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the First Court of Appeals in Houston pursuant to a docket equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 73.001. 1 She has now filed a first amended motion to dismiss her appeal on grounds that she no longer wishes to proceed with the appeal. Appellee Muhammad-Habib Jamil does not oppose the appellant’s motion to dismiss. The Court, having examined and fully considered the unopposed first amended motion to dismiss, is of the opinion that it should be granted. Accordingly, we grant appellant’s unopposed first amended motion to dismiss and we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1) (“In accordance with a motion of appellant, the court may dismiss the appeal or affirm the appealed judgment or order unless such disposition would prevent a party from seeking relief to which it would otherwise be entitled.”). The parties do not assert that they have reached an agreement regarding the assessment of costs, and therefore, the costs will be taxed against the appellant. See id. R. 42.1(d) (“Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant.”). Having dismissed the appeal at the appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith. NORA L. LONGORIA Justice Delivered and filed the 17th day of December, 2020. 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.