Texas HHSC v. Collier — Appeal dismissed after settlement

Case
Texas Health and Human Services Commission; Cecile Erwin Young, Executive Commissioner; Laura Castillo, Director of Heightened Monitoring; And Department of Family and Protective Services v. Kenneth Collier, Taneshu Collier, TRELS Home for Children, and TRELS Home LLC
Court
Texas 15th Court of Appeals
Judge
Not specified
Date Decided
July 21, 2026
Docket No.
15-25-00182-CV
Topics
Settlement, Voluntary Dismissal, Appellate Procedure
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

The Texas Health and Human Services Commission, Executive Commissioner Cecile Erwin Young, Director of Heightened Monitoring Laura Castillo, and the Department of Family and Protective Services appealed from a proceeding in Travis County’s 345th District Court involving Kenneth Collier, Taneshu Collier, TRELS Home for Children, and TRELS Home LLC.

On March 24, 2026, the Fifteenth Court of Appeals granted the appellants’ unopposed motion to abate the appeal while the parties pursued settlement discussions. On July 15, 2026, the appellants filed an unopposed motion to dismiss, advising the court that the parties had settled.

The Court’s Holding

The court lifted the abatement and reinstated the appeal on its active docket so it could act on the dismissal request.

It then granted the unopposed motion and dismissed the appeal under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1. The per curiam memorandum opinion did not address the merits of the underlying dispute or describe the settlement’s terms.

Key Takeaways

  • The court dismissed the appeal after the parties reached a settlement.
  • The appeal was reinstated from abatement before the dismissal motion was granted.
  • The dismissal was procedural and did not resolve the merits of the parties’ underlying claims.

Why It Matters

The decision illustrates how a Texas appellate court may abate an appeal to allow settlement discussions and later dismiss the matter under Rule 42.1 once the parties settle. Because the opinion contains no merits ruling, it establishes no substantive holding concerning the agencies, the appellees, or the underlying dispute.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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