Opinion
11-23-00131-CV
08-24-2023
IN RE ESTATE OF JAMES DWAIN VINSON
Original Mandamus Proceeding
Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter, J., and Williams, J.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
W. BRUCE WILLIAMS JUSTICE
This mandamus proceeding arises out of requests to probate competing wills. Relator, James D. Vinson, seeks to probate a will dated December 8, 1994 and Real Party in Interest, Alma Ruth Vinson, seeks to probate a will dated October 7, 2022. Relator asserts that the decedent, James Dwain Vinson, lacked testamentary capacity at the time that he executed the October 7, 2022 will, or that it was executed as a result of undue influence by Alma and her son.
Relator has filed a motion to disqualify members of McMahon Surovik Suttle, PC (McMahon) from representing Alma. Relator maintains that, because the 2022 will was drafted by Chet Caldwell, a member of McMahon, the entire firm should be disqualified from representing Vinson, arguing that Caldwell's former representation of the decedent creates a conflict of interest. See Tex. Disciplinary Rules Prof'l Conduct R. 1.05, 1.06, 1.09, reprinted in Tex. Gov't Code Ann., tit. 2, subtit. G, app. A (Tex. State Bar R. art. X, § 9). Relator also argues that, because Caldwell is a witness in the case, McMahon's representation of Alma will lead to a violation of the attorney-witness rule. See Tex. Disciplinary Rules Prof'l Conduct R. 3.08 (Tex. State Bar R. art. X, § 9).
Respondent denied Relator's motion to disqualify, but expressed a willingness to reconsider the issue as the case develops. We have concluded that Respondent has not abused her discretion in the provisional disposition of Relator's motion. See In re Turner, 542 S.W.3d 553, 555 (Tex. 2017) (orig. proceeding) (motion to disqualify law firm reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.