Opinion

Atlas Dental, LP Irma Cantu-Thompson, DDS, PC and Irma Cantu-Thompson Dr. Richard F. Herrscher Victor M. Zurita, DDS MAN & CFN Ortho, PLLC Navarro Orthodontix of Irving, PC Navarro Orthodontix of Ft. Worth, PLLC Navarro Orthodontix of McAllen, PLLC v. State

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
Filed
Feb 13, 2015
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

ACCEPTED

03-14-00614-CV

4147868

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

2/13/2015 2:34:45 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

NO. 03-14-00614-CV CLERK

IN THE

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS FILED IN

3rd COURT OF APPEALS

OF TEXAS AUSTIN, TEXAS

2/13/2015 2:34:45 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

Clerk

ATLAS DENTAL, LP, ET AL

Appellant,

v.

THESTATEOFTEXAS

Appellees.

On appeal from the 53rd District Court, Travis County, Texas

Cause No. NO. D-1-GV-14-000581

APPELLANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO VACATE AND DISMISS

APPEAL WITH PREJUDICE

Appellant asks the court to vacate and dismiss this appeal with prejudice.

A. INTRODUCTION

1.. Appellants are Atlas Dental, LP and Dr. Hieu Huynh; Irma Cantu-

Thompson, DDS, PC and Irma Cantu-Thompson; Dr. Stephen Chu; Dr. Richard

F. Herrscher; MAN & CFN Ortho, PLLC, Navarro Orthodontix of Irving, PC,

Navarro Orthodontix of Ft. Worth, PLLC, Navarro Orthodontix of Mcallen,

PLLC, Navarro Orthodontix of Edinburg, PLLC, Navarro Orthodontix, PC, and

Dr. Carlos F. Navarro; RGV Smiles by Rocky L. Salinas, DDS, PA and Dr.

Appellant Atlas Dental, LLP, et al. Motion to Dismiss

Page 1 of5

Rocky Salinas (hereinafter "Atlas Dental, LP, et al."); Victor M. Zurita, DDS;

appellee is the State of Texas.

2. Appellant perfected the appeal on September 23, 2014, when it filed a

notice of appeal.

B. ARGUMENT & AUTHORITIES

3. The court has the authority under Texas Rule of Appellant Procedure

42.1(a) to grant this motion to dismiss.

4. Since the filing ofthe appeal by Atlas Dental, LP, et al., the State of Texas

brought separate claims against several dentists including Richard F. Herrscher,

D.D.S., RGV Smiles by Rocky L. Salinas, DDS, PA and Dr. Rocky Salinas; that

new case is styled State v. Nazari, et al., Cause No. D-1-GN-14-005380

(hereinafter "5380").

5. Subsequently, the State of Texas and Atlas Dental, LP, et al., have entered

into an agreement to dismiss this appeal. (See Attached Exhibit A -February 12,

2015 Rule 11 Agreement). The parties have agreed that the issues in this appeal

will likely be duplicative of the issues to be considered in 5380, so this appeal can

be vacated.

6. Appellant asks the Court to vacate this appeal and dismiss it with prejudice.

Appellant Atlas Dental, LLP, et al. Motion to Dismiss

Page 2 of5

CONCLUSION AND PRAYER

7. For these reasons, the Appellant respectfully requests that court vacate and

dismiss this appeal with prejudice.

Respectfully Submitted,

JasonRay U

"' l

State Bar No. 24000511

RIGGS ALESHIRE & RAY, P.C.

700 Lavaca, Suite 920

Austin, Texas 78701

(512) 457-9806 Telephone

(512) 457-9066 Facsimile

jray@r-alaw.com

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

Appellant Atlas Dental, LLP, et al. Motion to Dismiss

Page 3 of5

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I communicated by e-mail on February 12, 2015 with opposing counsel,

Raymond Winter (for the State of Texas) and the attached Rule 11 agreement with

the State indicates that the State does not oppose this motion.

Appellant Atlas Dental, LLP, et al. Motion to Dismiss

Page 4 of5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was

served by eservice on February 13, 2015 to the following:

Counsel (or State o(Texas:

Raymond Winter

Office of the Attorney General

P.O. Box 12458

Austin, TX 78711-2548

raymond. winter@texasattomeygeneral.gov

Counsel (or ACS State Healthcare,LLC:

Eric J.R. Nichols

Christopher R. Cowan

Beck Redden, LLP

515 Congress Avenue, Suite 1750

Austin, Texas, 78701

enichols@beckredden.com

ccowan@beckredden.com

Appellant Atlas Dental, LLP, et al. Motion to Dismiss

Page 5 of5

EXHIBIT A

February 12, 2015 Rule 11

2/9/2015 2:58:18 PM

Velva L. Price

District Clerk

Jennifer S. Riggs FranklirciWpllotmty

( "ertifted in Admini.rtrative Law RIGGS&RAY Cert!/WJ1 dtflrfif'!'t21.!!f)illv380

Te.ra• Board qf Legal Speclaflzatwn A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Te..tci.r ~;ard OfJ.ega) Specl'dh'::atmn

jriggs!ii)r·alaw.com ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS fhopkins!ii)r·alaw.com

700 LAVACA, SUITE 920

Jason Ray AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701

Certified in Admlnlstra/il'e Law 512 457-9806 TELEPHONE

Texa< Bnard ofLegal Specialization 512 457-9066 FACSIMILE

jray~r-alaw.com

February 9, 2015

Raymond Winter via e-mail to:

Chief, Civil Medicaid Fraud Division raymond.winter@.texasattornevgeneral.gov

Assistant Attorney General

Office of the Attorney General

P.O. Box 12548

Austin, Texas 78711-2548

Re: Cause No. D-1-GN-000319; Harlingen Family Dentistry, P.C. and Dr. Juan Villarreal,

D.D.S. v. ACS State Healthcare, LLC, in the 53rd Judicial District, Travis County, Texas

and

Cause No. D-1-GN-000321; M&M Orthodontics, PA, Dr. Scott Malone, DDS and Dr.

Diana Malone, DDS, v ACS State Healthcare, LLC, in the 1261h Judicial District, Travis

County, Texas.

Dear Ray:

The Harlingen Family Dentistry plaintiffs brought claims against the State of Texas in Cause No.

D-1-GN-14-000319 (hereinafter "319"). The M&M Orthodontics plaintiffs brought claims

against the State of Texas in Cause No. D-1-GN-14-000321 (hereinafter "321"). The District

Court signed an order granting the State's Plea to the Jurisdiction in 319 and 321 on September

18, 2014. The plaintiffs in 319 and 321 appealed the Order Granting the State's Plea to the

Jurisdiction and that appeal is pending. The State subsequently brought separate claims against

several dentists and, inter alia, the plaintiffs in 319 and 321; that new case is styled State v.

Nazari, et al., Cause No. D-1-GN-14-005380 (hereinafter "5380").

By this agreement, the plaintiffs in 319 and 321 agree to dismiss with prejudice the appeal of the

Order Granting the State's Plea to the Jurisdiction. The parties agree that the plaintiffs are not

required to dismiss any claims against Xerox in 319 and 321. In exchange, the State agrees and

stipulates that the plaintiffs in 319 and 321 do not waive and by their dismissal of the appeal of

the Order Granting the State's Plea to the Jurisdiction do not settle, any causes of action the

plaintiffs in 319 and 321 may have against third parties, including Xerox. The State agrees that

the dismissal of the appeal of the Order Granting the State's Plea to the Jurisdiction in 319 and

321 will not act to prevent the assertion or appeal of any claims or defenses that may be raised in

5380.

Raymond Winter

February 9, 2015

Page 2 of2

If the State agrees, please sign this and return it to me. I will consider it a Rule II agreement, and

each side can proceed with our respective arguments in the 5380 case, which should make for a

smaller, cleaner appellate record.

Sincerely,

.

Ray nd Winter

on behalf of the State of Texas

in Cause Nos. D-1-GN-14-000319,

D-1-GN-14-000321, and D-1-GN-14-005380

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.