In Re: Express Delivery Enterprise LLC v. the State of Texas

NO. 12-23-00088-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: §

EXPRESS DELIVERY ENTERPRISE
LLC, § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

RELATOR §

MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
Express Delivery Enterprise, LLC (Express) filed this original proceeding to challenge
Respondent’s refusal to dismiss the claims against Express when the parties entered a contractual
agreement to litigate any dispute under the contract in an Idaho court. 1 On July 21, 2023, this Court
conditionally granted the petition and directed Respondent to vacate his order denying Express’s motion
to dismiss and, in its stead, to sign an order granting Express’s motion to dismiss. By an order signed on
August 1, Respondent complied with this Court’s opinion and order, rendering this proceeding moot.
Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus as moot.

Opinion delivered August 9, 2023.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

1
Respondent is the Honorable Vincent Dulweber, Judge of the County Court at Law No. 2 in Gregg
County, Texas. Rogers & Doty Enterprises, LLC d/b/a Redline Transport is the Real Party in Interest.
COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JUDGMENT

AUGUST 9, 2023

NO. 12-23-00088-CV

EXPRESS DELIVERY ENTERPRISE LLC,
Relator
V.

HON. JUDGE VINCENT DULWEBER,
Respondent

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by
Express Delivery Enterprise LLC; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-23-00088-CV
and the defendant in trial court cause number 2022-1438-CCL2, pending on the docket of the
County Court at Law No. 2 of Gregg County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having
been filed herein on March 30, 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 petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby
dismissed as moot.
By per curiam opinion.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.