Caraday Windcrest — Fourth Court dismisses appeal on appellants’ unopposed motion

Case
Caraday Windcrest LLC, dba Windcrest Nursing and Rehabilitation and Caraday Management LLC d/b/a Windcrest Nursing and Rehabilitation v. Joseph Bocanegra and Roman Bocanegra, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Robert J. Bocanegra, Deceased
Court
Texas Fourth Court of Appeals
Judge
Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice (elected 2012); H. Todd McCray, Justice (elected 2024); Velia J. Meza, Justice (elected 2024)
Date Decided
September 16, 2026
Docket No.
04-26-00545-CV
Topics
Appellate Procedure; Voluntary Dismissal; Costs
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Caraday Windcrest LLC and Caraday Management LLC appealed from a proceeding in the 73rd Judicial District Court of Bexar County, where Judge Elizabeth Martinez presided. Joseph Bocanegra and Roman Bocanegra, individually and on behalf of the estate of Robert J. Bocanegra, were the appellees.

On September 1, 2026, the appellants filed an unopposed motion asking the Fourth Court of Appeals to dismiss the appeal. The memorandum opinion does not describe the underlying claims or explain why dismissal was requested.

The Court’s Holding

The Fourth Court of Appeals granted the appellants’ motion and dismissed the appeal under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1), which permits dismissal on an appellant’s motion.

Applying Rule 42.1(d), the court assessed the appellate costs against the appellants. The per curiam memorandum opinion did not address the merits of the underlying dispute.

Key Takeaways

  • An appellant may seek voluntary dismissal under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1).
  • The appellees did not oppose the dismissal request.
  • The appeal was dismissed without a merits ruling, and appellate costs were assessed against the appellants.

Why It Matters

The decision illustrates the straightforward procedure for voluntarily ending a Texas appeal when the dismissal request is unopposed. It also underscores that dismissal does not necessarily eliminate financial consequences because the court may assess appellate costs against the appellants.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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