with this rule.” Tex.R. Civ. P. 506.1(h). “[I]t is well-settled that perfection of an appeal to county court from a justice court for trial de novo vacates and annuls the judgment of the justice court.” Villalon v. Bank One, 176 S.W.3d 66, 69-70 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, pet. denied). It is undisputed that Palavan perfected his appeal to the county court. See Tex.R.'Civ. P. 506.1(h). Accordingly, the judgment of the justice of the peace court was vacated and annulled. See Villalon, 176 S.W.3d at 69-70. Palavan argues that, as a result, the agreed judgment did not bar his claims before the county court. We disagree. Agreed judgments are based on agreements between the parties and are construed as contracts. See Gulf Ins. Co. v. Burns Motors, Inc., 22 S.W.3d 417, 422 (Tex.2000) (<HOLDING>); Hicks v. Hicks, 348 S.W.3d 281, 283
holding rules of procedure interpreted in same manner as statutes holding an ambiguous contract will be construed against the party drafting the same holding same holding agreed judgments are treated as contract beiween parties holding agreed judgments are construed in same manner as contract