Once upon a time a trial court’s decision on a question of dominant jurisdiction was not subject to mandamus relief unless one court was actively interfering with another court’s exercise of jurisdiction. The Texas Supreme Court has abrogated that standard in favor of the more flexible standard the court adopted in In re Prudential Insurance
Mandamus
When is Mandamus Relief Available for Conflicting Trial Settings?
The Texas Supreme Court’s holding in In re Prudential Insurance Co. of America, 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding)—that determining whether an appellate remedy is “adequate” requires a balancing of the benefits and detriments of mandamus review and is not an abstract or formulaic determination—seems to have caused a split among the…
Trial court’s reach exceeds its grasp
The Dallas Court of Appeals recently held that a trial court lacks jurisdiction to issue a show-cause order for a non-party to appear if the party is outside the subpoena power of the court. Here, after one unsuccessful mediation, the parties attempted another mediation during trial with the trial court’s blessing. The trial court determined…
Mandamus subject to laches
The Dallas Court of Appeals recently reaffirmed that mandamus is controlled by equitable principles, including laches. Here, the relator waited almost nine months to file its petition without explanation. The Court relied on cases finding waiver in which the petitioner waited four to six months before filing for no apparent reason. Accordingly the Court found…
Expert disclosures and the property owner rule
The Dallas Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion dealing with two recurring topics: the property owner rule and timely designation of experts. In this foreclosure case, the Court addressed market value testimony by four witnesses. In doing so, the Court applied TRCP 193.6 and the property owner rule.
First, the Court addressed two expert…
Discretion to issue “superdupersedeas” against the State
The Supreme Court of Texas has recognized the discretion of a trial court judge to deny the State of Texas automatic supersedeas in cases involving non-monetary judgments pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 24.2(a)(3).
In In re State Board for Educator Certification, a schoolteacher challenged the State Board for Educator Certification’s revocation…
Mandamus Developments at the Dallas Court of Appeals
As most appellate lawyers around Dallas know, the Fifth Court of Appeals has a reputation (well-earned) for disposing of petitions for mandamus in, let’s say, a summary fashion. Specifically, the mandamus denials, with few exceptions, have consisted of three-sentences memorandum opinions, two of which were reserved for the standard introduction ("The facts are well known…
Mandamus Fundamentals
In the heat of the rush to get a mandamus filed with the court of appeals, it’s easy to overlook basic mandamus requirements. That appears to be what happened in In re Moffitt, a mandamus proceeding filed in the Amarillo Court of Appeals.
Mr. Moffitt sought a mandamus to compel the Hutchinson County District…
Mandamus for Discovery of Personal Computer Hard Drive
The Dallas Court of Appeals granted a petition for writ of mandamus in a case in which the trial court ordered production of a personal computer hard drive and e-mail account.
Misty Jordan sued Gajekse, Inc. alleging that she was subjected to a hostile work environment and then fired for reporting it. The trial court…
Dominant Jurisdiction and Mandamus Relief
Since 1985, the test for whether a writ of mandamus will issue in connection with a trial court’s refusal to grant a plea in abatement under the doctrine of dominant jurisdiction has required proof of an active interference by one court with the jurisdiction of another court. The loosening of mandamus standards does not appear…