Opinion
01-23-00934-CV
01-18-2024
In re Four Oaks Place Operating, L.P.
295th District Court of Harris County Trial court case number: 2020-81924
ORDER
Amparo Monique Guerra, Judge
On December 15, 2023, relator, Four Oaks Place Operating, L.P., filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by granting the "Amended Motion to Quash Jury Demand and Payment of Jury Fee," filed by real party in interest David Allen. In its mandamus petition, relator requested that the Court issue a writ of mandamus directing the trial court "to vacate its November 27, 2023 Order granting Allen's motion to quash Four Oaks' jury demand."
The Court requested that Allen file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus, currently due on or before January 17, 2024. However, on January 11, 2024, the parties filed a "Joint Notice of Settlement and Motion to Abate Deadlines." The parties jointly filed this notice to advise the Court that they "recently reached an agreement that would resolve the case." The parties further state that they "are in the process of finalizing the terms of the settlement and preparing the necessary settlement documents to formalize the agreement," which the parties expect to finalize "within [thirty] days." Once the settlement is finalized, relator "expects to file a motion to dismiss this original proceeding."
Accordingly, the parties request the original proceeding be abated for a period of thirty days, thereby suspending pending deadlines of this Court, for the parties to finalize the settlement documents. The motion is filed jointly by relator and real party in interest and is signed by counsel for all parties. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a)(2).
The parties' motion to abate this original proceeding is granted. This original proceeding is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from the Court's active docket. Within forty-five days of the date of this order, the parties are directed to file a motion to dismiss the original proceeding or a report advising the Court of the status of the proceedings. Failure to respond as directed may result in this proceeding being reinstated on the Court's active docket and deadlines being set.
It is so ORDERED.