Opinion
01-24-00143-CV
10-10-2024
Zachary T. Dixon, as Attorney-in-Fact for Karin Dixon v. George Schilter, Independent Executor of the Estate of Kathrin Gvadia, Deceased and Shriners Hospitals for Children
Trial court: Probate Court of Galveston County, Trial court case number: PR-0080172
ORDER OF CONTINUED ABATEMENT
David Gunn, Judge.
On July 29, 2024, appellant, Zachary T. Dixon, as Attorney-in-Fact for Karin Dixon, has filed an "Unopposed Motion to Abate Appeal Pending Settlement." Appellant requested abatement because the parties had "reached an agreement to settle this matter," but needed additional time to "allow the parties time to finalize their settlement."
On August 6, 2024, the Court granted appellant's motion, abated the appeal, and directed the parties, within forty-five days of the Court's order, to file a motion to dismiss the appeal or a report advising the Court of the status of the proceedings. On September 17, 2024, counsel for the parties jointly notified the Court that "the parties need[ed] additional time to finalize and sign the written terms of their settlement agreement before [the] appeal can be dismissed."
On September 20, 2024, appellant filed an "Unopposed Motion to Extend Abatement of Appeal Pending Settlement." In the motion, appellant requested that the Court "extend the abatement period for an additional thirty days" to allow the parties to finalize the terms of their settlement.
Appellant's motion includes a certificate of conference stating that appellees, George Schilter, Independent Executor of the Estate of Kathrin Gvadia, Deceased and Shriners Hospitals for Children, are unopposed to the relief requested in the motion. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a)(2).
Appellant's motion is granted. The appeal remains abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from the Court's active docket. Within thirty days of the date of this order, the parties are directed to file a motion to dismiss the appeal or a report advising the Court of the status of the proceedings. Failure to respond as directed may result in the appeal being reinstated on the Court's active docket to proceed under the applicable Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.
It is so ORDERED.