in Re Howard Lee Atkinson Jr. ( 2018 )

NUMBER 13-18-00431-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
IN RE HOWARD ATKINSON
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Writ of Prohibition.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides1
Relator Howard Atkinson filed a conditional amended petition for writ of mandamus
and writ of prohibition in the above cause on August 6, 2018. Through this original
proceeding, Atkinson contends that the trial court would abuse its discretion in refusing
to enter judgment on a mediated settlement agreement based on an inquiry regarding
whether that agreement was in a minor child’s best interest.
1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in
any other case,” but when “denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do
so.”); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).
On August 3, 2018, Atkinson filed a largely identical petition for writ of mandamus
and writ of prohibition. On the morning of August 6, 2018, this Court denied relief. In re
Atkinson, No. 13-18-00423-CV, 2018 WL 3723095, at *1 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Aug.
6, 2018, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). The conditional amended petition for writ of
mandamus and prohibition that is currently at issue here was filed later that afternoon.
This Court has already determined the issue presented here. Accordingly, we
dismiss this conditional amended petition for writ of mandamus and writ of prohibition,
and all relief sought therein, as moot. See City of Krum, Tex. v. Rice, 543 S.W.3d 747,
749 (Tex. 2017) (per curiam); Heckman v. Williamson Cty., 369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex.
2012); In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005) (orig.
proceeding)
GINA M. BENAVIDES,
Justice
Delivered and filed the
8th day of August, 2018.
2