in Re TaDarrian Johnson ( 2020 )


Menu:
  • Dismissed and Opinion Filed March 11, 2020
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    No. 05-20-00068-CV
    IN RE TADARRIAN JOHNSON, Relator
    Original Proceeding from the 265th Judicial District Court
    Dallas County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause Nos. F08-55949-R & F11-58573-R
    OPINION
    Before Justices Schenck, Partida-Kipness, and Nowell
    Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness
    In this original proceeding, relator TaDarrian Johnson seeks a writ of
    mandamus compelling the trial court to rule on a “Motion For Nunc Pro Tunc”
    relator filed seeking to delete fines and fees from the clerk’s bill of costs. The trial
    court’s online docket sheet shows the trial court denied relator’s motion by order
    entered on March 28, 2019.1 A case becomes moot if “the issues presented are no
    1
    An appellate court has the discretion to take judicial notice of adjudicative facts that are matters of
    public record on its own motion. See TEX. R. EVID. 201(b); In re Estate of Hemsley, 
    460 S.W.3d 629
    , 638
    (Tex. App.—El Paso 2014, pet. denied). Generally, appellate courts take judicial notice of facts outside the
    record only to determine jurisdiction or to resolve matters ancillary to decisions which are mandated by
    law. SEI Bus. Sys., Inc. v. Bank One Texas, N.A., 
    803 S.W.2d 838
    , 841 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, no writ);
    see Freedom Commc’ns, Inc. v. Coronado, 
    372 S.W.3d 621
    , 624 (Tex. 2012). For example, “[I]t is
    appropriate to take judicial notice of the official record to determine the current status of the underlying
    case.” In re Ramirez, No. 08-15-00270-CV, 
    2015 WL 6768739
    , at *1, n.1 (Tex. App.—El Paso Nov. 5,
    longer live or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” Harlow
    Land Co., Ltd. v. City of Melissa, 
    314 S.W.3d 713
    , 716 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010,
    no pet.). A court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over a case that has become moot.
    
    Id. Because relator
    has received the relief requested in his petition, his petition is
    now moot. See In re Bonilla, 
    424 S.W.3d 528
    , 534 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (orig.
    proceeding) (relief sought in mandamus proceeding became moot when relator
    obtained information sought in petition from district clerk). Accordingly, we dismiss
    relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See id.; see also In re Evans, 
    581 S.W.3d 431
    , 434 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2019, orig. proceeding) (dismissing petition for
    writ of mandamus because matter had become moot).
    /Robbie Partida-Kipness/
    ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS
    JUSTICE
    200068F.P05
    2015, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). Here, we take judicial notice of the trial court’s online docket sheets in
    cause numbers F08-55949-R and F11-58573-R. See Praise Deliverance Church v. Jelinis, LLC, 
    536 S.W.3d 849
    , 853 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, pet. denied) (taking judicial notice of publicly accessible
    court docket sheets); see also In re De Leon, No. 04-05-00057-CV, 
    2005 WL 291440
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—
    San Antonio Feb. 9, 2005, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (taking judicial notice of docket sheets from
    underlying proceedings).
    –2–
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-20-00068-CV

Filed Date: 3/11/2020

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 3/12/2020