In Re: State Automobile Mutual Insurance Company v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )

NO. 12-23-00216-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
TYLER, TEXAS
IN RE: §
STATE AUTOMOBILE MUTUAL § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
INSURANCE COMPANY,
§
RELATOR
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
State Automobile Mutual Insurance Company filed this original proceeding to challenge
Respondent’s order denying its motion to quash the deposition of a corporate representative. 1
Relator filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this proceeding on grounds that the parties reached
an agreement concerning the subject of the mandamus petition. Accordingly, we grant the
motion and dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1. In accordance
with the agreement, costs are taxed against the party incurring same. We lift our stay of August
23, 2023.
Opinion delivered September 29, 2023.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
Respondent is the Honorable Steven Kirkland, sitting by assignment in the 145th Judicial District Court of
1
Nacogdoches County, Texas. Kyle Doss is the Real Party in Interest.
COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JUDGMENT
SEPTEMBER 29, 2023
NO. 12-23-00216-CV
STATE AUTOMOBILE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,
Relator
V.
HON. JUDGE STEVEN KIRKLAND,
Respondent
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ON THIS DAY came to be heard the unopposed motion to dismiss the petition for writ of
mandamus filed by State Automobile Mutual Insurance Company; who is the relator in appellate
cause number 12-23-00216-CV and the defendant in trial court cause number C2237672,
pending on the docket of the 145th Judicial District Court of Nacogdoches County, Texas. Said
petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on August 22, 2023, and the same having
been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that the writ should not issue, it is
therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said unopposed motion to
dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, granted and this proceeding is
dismissed. Costs are taxed against the party incurring same.
By per curiam opinion.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
2