From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Espinoza

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Jan 8, 2020
No. 04-19-00838-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 8, 2020)

Opinion

No. 04-19-00838-CV

01-08-2020

IN RE Joe Anthony ESPINOZA


MEMORANDUM OPINION

Original Mandamus Proceeding Opinion by: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Irene Rios, Justice PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS CONDITIONALLY GRANTED

This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 1915-C, styled In the Interest of J.A.E., Jr., a Child, pending in the County Court at Law, Kerr County, Texas, the Honorable Susan Harris presiding.

On December 2, 2019, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the trial court's refusal to rule on his "Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction." Real party in interest, Mie Doak, filed a response to the petition in which she stated "no objection to . . . [relator] asking for a Trial Court ruling on the issue of standing." We conditionally grant the petition for writ of mandamus.

DISCUSSION

Relator filed a motion to dismiss in February 2019. The trial court conducted a hearing on the motion on March 25, 2019. Since that date, the trial court has refused to issue a ruling on relator's motion although the court continues to issue other rulings in the underlying case.

"A trial court is required to consider and rule on a motion within a reasonable time." Safety-Kleen Corp. v. Garcia, 945 S.W.2d 268, 269 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, orig. proceeding). "'When a motion is properly filed and pending before a trial court, the act of giving consideration to and ruling upon that motion is a ministerial act,' and mandamus may issue to compel the trial judge to act." Id. (citation omitted). However, while we have jurisdiction to direct the trial court to proceed to judgment, we may not tell the court what judgment it should enter. Crofts v. Court of Civil Appeals, 362 S.W.2d 101, 105 (Tex. 1962) (orig. proceeding).

Relator's motion to dismiss has been pending for over ten months. Because the trial court has erred by not ruling on relator's motion within a reasonable time, we conditionally grant relator's petition for writ of mandamus. The writ will issue only if the trial court fails to rule on relator's motion to dismiss within fourteen days of this opinion.

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice


Summaries of

In re Espinoza

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Jan 8, 2020
No. 04-19-00838-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 8, 2020)
Case details for

In re Espinoza

Case Details

Full title:IN RE Joe Anthony ESPINOZA

Court:Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Date published: Jan 8, 2020

Citations

No. 04-19-00838-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 8, 2020)

Citing Cases

In re Espinoza

In the first original proceeding, this court conditionally granted relator's petition for writ of mandamus…