Opinion

Sunbelt Securities Inc., the Fisher Group, Cheryl Brown and Jeanine Fisher v. David Mark Mandell

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Filed
Sep 13, 2022
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Sunbelt Securities, Inc., The Fisher Group, Cheryl Brown,

Jeanine Fisher, and Monique Mandell v. David Mark

Mandell and Raymond J. Black, Administrator of the Estate

of William Mandell, Deceased

Appellate case number: 01-21-00209-CV

Trial court case number: 473747-402

Trial court: Probate Court No. 1 of Harris County

This case was set for in person oral argument on Wednesday, September 28, 2022.

On September 2, Appellants Sunbelt Securities, Inc., The Fisher Group, Cheryl Brown,

and Jeanine Fisher (“Sunbelt Appellants”) filed a letter informing this Court that a

settlement had been reached between some of the parties, namely between separate

Appellant Monique Mandell (“Monique”) and Appellees David Mark Mandell (“David”)

and Raymond J. Black, Administrator of the Estate of William Mandell, Deceased (the

“Administrator”), resolving some of the claims underlying this appeal. The Sunbelt

Appellants also stated that, although none of the claims against them had been dismissed

in the trial court, it was possible the claims against them were rendered moot by the

settlement between Monique and David and the Administrator.

This case has been removed from the oral argument docket on September 28 and

we anticipate this case will be reset for submission on November 10, 2022. In light of the

information recently provided by the Sunbelt Appellants, and in connection with the

planned rescheduling of this case for submission, all parties are ordered to file

supplemental briefing on the issues identified below. Both appellants’ and appellees’

supplemental briefs shall be due no later than 21 days from the date of this order, or

Tuesday, October 4, 2022. The supplemental briefing should be limited to the identified

issues and may not, without leave of court, be longer than 5,000 words if computer-

generated and 15 pages if not.

1. Has there been a settlement of any of the underlying claims between any of

the parties to this appeal? If so, identify which parties are parties to the

settlement and which claims have been settled and/or dismissed.

2. If not all parties are parties to the settlement, which parties and claims remain

pending in the trial court?

3. What is the effect of the settlement on this appeal?

4. If not all parties are parties to the settlement, what is the effect of the

settlement on the claims against the remaining parties? Are any of the

remaining claims rendered moot due to the purported settlement between

Monique and David and the Administrator? Why or why not?

5. When the briefs were originally filed, all parties (except for the

Administrator) requested oral argument. Confirm whether oral argument is

still desired.

The parties should expect to address the above topics, as well as the remainder of the legal

arguments presented in their respective briefs, at oral argument if it is confirmed that oral

argument is still desired by the parties.

Further, the county clerk for Probate Court No. 1 of Harris County is ordered to file a

supplemental clerk’s record containing all orders approving any settlement agreement

between any parties and all orders dismissing claims against any defendant within fourteen

days of the date of this order, or by Tuesday, September 27, 2022.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Amparo Guerra

Acting Individually

Date: September 13, 2022

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.