Opinion
05-23-01209-CV
12-01-2023
IN RE STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY AND JERI CHARLOTTE RAMOS, Relators
Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-23-02251-B
Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Carlyle, and Garcia
MEMORANDUM OPINION
CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE
Before the Court are relators' November 30, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus and emergency motion for temporary relief. In their petition, relators challenge a trial court order compelling their respective depositions. In their emergency motion, relators seek to stay the depositions pending our action on the petition.
Entitlement to mandamus relief requires a relator to show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that the relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). The relator bears the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record to show it is entitled to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).
Relators' petition does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See, e.g., TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1), 52.7(a)(2). For instance, relator attempted to swear to the authenticity of the documents in the record using an attorney's verification. But the verification is defective because it is written in relation to a separate lawsuit and is signed by an attorney who does not appear to be counsel of record.
Alternatively, notwithstanding these defects, after reviewing relator's petition and the record before us, we conclude that relator has failed to demonstrate entitlement to mandamus relief. See In re State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 05-23-01062-CV, 2023 WL 7984390, at *1 (Tex. App.-Dallas Nov. 17, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
We also deny relators' emergency motion for temporary relief as moot.