Quik-Way Retail Associates II v. TAF Tarrant Properties — Appeal dismissed with prejudice and settlement implemented

Case
Quik-Way Retail Associates II, Ltd., Empire Petroleum Partners, LLC, GPM Empire, LLC and GPM Investments, LLC v. TAF Tarrant Properties, LP, and RP Texas Mgt, LLC
Court
Texas Sixth Court of Appeals
Judge
Scott E. Stevens (elected 2018)
Date Decided
July 20, 2026
Docket No.
06-26-00009-CV
Topics
Appellate Procedure, Settlement, Voluntary Dismissal, Supersedeas Bond
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

The appellants appealed from a final judgment signed by the 141st District Court of Tarrant County on September 22, 2025. The Texas Supreme Court transferred the appeal from the Second Court of Appeals to the Sixth Court of Appeals under a docket-equalization order.

On July 9, 2026, the parties filed an agreed motion asking the appellate court to dismiss the appeal with prejudice and render judgment implementing their settlement under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(2)(A).

The Court’s Holding

The Sixth Court of Appeals granted the agreed motion and dismissed the appeal with prejudice. It rendered judgment effectuating the parties’ settlement under Rules 42.1(a)(2)(A) and 43.2(f) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The court ordered the district clerk to release the appellants’ supersedeas bond, bond number 30258604, and discharged the appellants, all principals under the bond, and Western Surety Company from obligations and liability under it. The court also directed the clerk to release to GPM Empire, LLC, all funds deposited in the trial court’s registry in the underlying case, including accrued interest. Each party was ordered to bear its own appellate costs.

Key Takeaways

  • An appellate court may dismiss an appeal and render an agreed judgment to implement the parties’ settlement.
  • The dismissal was with prejudice, as jointly requested by the parties.
  • The judgment released the supersedeas bond and registry funds and assigned each party its own appellate costs.

Why It Matters

The decision illustrates how parties may use an agreed appellate disposition to conclude an appeal while obtaining specific orders needed to carry out their settlement. Here, dismissal alone was not the only relief: the court also addressed the security posted during the appeal and the funds held in the trial court’s registry.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top