Legal Opinion · Dissent

Enriquez v. Livingston

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided March 20, 2013No. Nos. 03-11-00791-CV, 03-11-00792-CVPublished

1DissentBob Pemberton, Justice

In light of the arguments presented by the State in its motion for rehearing regarding the timeliness of Enriquez’s motion to reinstate, I can no longer conclude that the district court abused its discretion when it denied the motion without an oral hearing. Because the majority holds otherwise, I respectfully dissent.

We are to review a dismissal for want of prosecution and the subsequent denial of a motion to reinstate under an abuse-of-discretion standard. See Smith v. Babcock & Wilcox Constr. Co., 913 S.W.2d 467, 467-68 (Tex.1995); Stale v. Rotello, 671 S.W.2d 507, 509 (Tex.1984); Brown…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Houston v. LackSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
  3. BMC Software Belgium, NV v. MarchandTexas Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Worford v. StamperTexas Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Walker v. GutierrezTexas Supreme Court · 2003

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API