Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Michael Pargas appealed an order granting One Network Enterprises, Inc.’s traditional motion for summary judgment. One Network filed a cross-appeal. The case originated in the 162nd District Court of Dallas County and was transferred from the Fifth Court of Appeals to the Seventh Court of Appeals through the Texas Supreme Court’s docket-equalization process.
At the parties’ request, the appellate court abated the case on June 26, 2026, so they could finalize a settlement agreement. After settling, the parties jointly moved to dismiss both the appeal and the cross-appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The court reinstated the appeal and granted the agreed motion for voluntary dismissal. It found that the motion complied with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1) and that dismissal would not prevent either party from seeking relief to which it otherwise would be entitled.
Because the court had not yet delivered a decision, it dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal. Under the parties’ agreement, each party was taxed the costs it incurred. The court also granted One Network’s counsel’s unopposed motion to withdraw and substitute lead counsel, stated that it would entertain no motion for rehearing, and directed that the mandate issue immediately.
Key Takeaways
- A settlement led the parties to seek voluntary dismissal of both the appeal and the cross-appeal.
- The court granted dismissal under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1) without addressing the merits of the summary-judgment order.
- Each party was responsible for its own incurred costs, and the mandate was ordered to issue immediately.
Why It Matters
The memorandum opinion illustrates the procedure for ending a Texas civil appeal by agreement after settlement. It also confirms that dismissal of an appeal and cross-appeal before an appellate decision leaves the underlying merits unresolved by the appellate court.