in Re: Tunad Enterprises, Inc. ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • DENY; and Opinion Filed November 16, 2018.
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    No. 05-18-01336-CV
    IN RE TUNAD ENTERPRISES, INC., Relator
    Original Proceeding from the 417th Judicial District Court
    Collin County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. 417-00618-2016
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before Justices Bridges, Brown, and Boatright
    Opinion by Justice Boatright
    Before the Court is relator’s petition for writ of mandamus in which relator complains of
    an order denying relator’s Rule 91a motion to dismiss. The denial of a Rule 91a motion to dismiss
    is subject to mandamus review. In re Essex Ins. Co., 
    450 S.W.3d 524
    , 526 (Tex. 2014). To be
    entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court has clearly abused its
    discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 
    148 S.W.3d 124
    , 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Although relator recited that standard of review in its
    petition, it did not attempt to identify anything the trial court did that was a clear abuse of
    discretion, nor did relator attempt to explain why it has no adequate appellate remedy. Because
    relator’s petition did not make its required showing, we must deny the petition. TEX. R. APP. P.
    52.8(a). Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.
    /Jason Boatright/
    JASON BOATRIGHT
    JUSTICE
    181336F.P05
    –2–
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-18-01336-CV

Filed Date: 11/16/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/19/2018