Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
This per curiam order and memorandum opinion was issued by the Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, at Austin, in No. 03-26-00807-CV. Blackmon Mooring of Austin, LLC is the appellant. Nancy Large, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Terry George Large, deceased, is the appellee. The appeal came from the 425th Judicial District Court of Williamson County, No. 25-0743-C425, with the Honorable Betsy F. Lambeth presiding.
The parties filed a joint motion asking the court to abate the appeal. In that motion, they represented that they had settled their dispute, including the claims that are the subject of the appeal. They also asserted that, upon finalization of the settlement agreement, they would file an agreed motion to dismiss the appeal. The order records those representations but does not describe the underlying dispute, identify the claims individually, or state any settlement terms.
Based on the parties’ request, the court considered whether to pause the appellate proceeding and suspend appellate deadlines. The parties sought that relief while their settlement agreement was being finalized. The order does not indicate any disagreement between the parties about the requested abatement; the request was presented jointly.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted the joint motion and abated the appeal until further order of the court. It also ordered that all appellate deadlines will be tolled during the abatement. The stated disposition is “Abated.” The order was entered on November 2, 2026, before Justices Triana, Crump, and Ellis.
The court established a specific filing requirement for the parties. By January 4, 2027, they must file one of three things: a motion to reinstate the appeal, a motion to dismiss the appeal, or a status report accompanied by a motion to extend the abatement. The order therefore provides alternatives for the next filing rather than directing only one course of action.
The court’s express basis for its action was the parties’ representations that they had settled their dispute, including the claims at issue in the appeal, and that they intended to file an agreed motion to dismiss after finalization of the settlement agreement. The order does not decide liability, damages, or any other substantive issue. It does not dismiss the appeal, approve settlement terms, or state that the settlement agreement has already been finalized.
Key Takeaways
- The Third Court of Appeals granted the parties’ joint motion and abated the appeal until further order of the court.
- All appellate deadlines are tolled during the abatement.
- By January 4, 2027, the parties must file a motion to reinstate, a motion to dismiss, or a status report accompanied by a motion to extend the abatement.
- The order rests on the parties’ reported settlement and their stated intention to seek dismissal after finalization; it makes no merits determination.
Why It Matters
The order establishes the appeal’s procedural status and the parties’ next filing obligation. Although the parties reported a settlement covering the claims on appeal, the appeal remains abated rather than dismissed. Their anticipated agreed motion to dismiss is tied to finalization of the settlement agreement.
The January 4, 2027 filing requirement gives the parties three stated options: reinstatement, dismissal, or a status report with a request to extend the abatement. The order specifies no consequence for noncompliance and supplies no additional reasoning beyond the parties’ representations and request.