From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Romero v. Gonzalez

COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
Nov 1, 2016
NUMBER 13-16-00172-CV (Tex. App. Nov. 1, 2016)

Opinion

NUMBER 13-16-00172-CV

11-01-2016

GLENN ROMERO, JUAN GONZALEZ, RICARDO BENAVIDES AND ROMERO, GONZALEZ & BENAVIDES, L. L. P., Appellants, v. ZACHARIAS GONZALEZ, Appellee.


On appeal from the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

ORDER ABATING APPEAL

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides
OrderPer Curiam

On April 4, 2016, appellants, Glenn Romero, Juan Gonzalez, Ricardo Benavides, and Romero, Gonzalez & Benavides, L.L.P. filed a petition for permission to appeal from the 93rd Judicial District Court's denial of their motion to dismiss. In the certificate of service, appellants certified that they had served Mark Cantu as attorney for appellee, Zacharias Gonzalez. In their docketing statement, appellants indicated that Mark Cantu, State Bar Number "23767445," had been disbarred as of April 11, 2016. On June 22, 2016, Mark A. Cantu III, state bar number "03767445," filed a notice of appeal challenging the trial court's judgment of disbarment signed on April 11, 2016. Cantu then filed a motion to stay the disbarment with our Court. On July 14, 2016, this Court denied the motion stating the following:

We find no other Mark Cantu at the State Bar of Texas website, and it appears that appellants incorrectly indicated that Mark Cantu's state bar number begins with a "2" instead of "0." --------

"A district court judgment of disbarment . . . from the practice of law cannot be superseded or stayed." TEX. R. DISCIPLINARY P. 3.14. We treat disciplinary rules with the same authority as statutes. See O'Quinn v. State Bar of Tex., 763 S.W.2d 397, 399 (Tex. 1988). In his motion, Cantu argues exactly for the type of relief that Rule 3.14 expressly and unambiguously prohibits. Therefore, the Court, having examined and fully considered the motion for emergency relief and response, is of the opinion that the motion should be denied.

Given the foregoing, we ABATE this matter and REMAND it to the trial court in order for the trial court to consider whether appellee wishes to retain other counsel. The trial court is ordered to immediately cause notice to be given and conduct a hearing on this matter. The trial court shall make and file appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law and cause them to be included in a clerk's record; cause the hearing to be transcribed and included in a reporter's record; and have these records forwarded to the Clerk of this Court within thirty days from the date of this order. If the trial court requires additional time to comply, the trial court should so notify the Clerk of this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 1st day of Novemberpe, 2016.


Summaries of

Romero v. Gonzalez

COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
Nov 1, 2016
NUMBER 13-16-00172-CV (Tex. App. Nov. 1, 2016)
Case details for

Romero v. Gonzalez

Case Details

Full title:GLENN ROMERO, JUAN GONZALEZ, RICARDO BENAVIDES AND ROMERO, GONZALEZ …

Court:COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

Date published: Nov 1, 2016

Citations

NUMBER 13-16-00172-CV (Tex. App. Nov. 1, 2016)