Opinion
05-21-00856-CV
05-26-2022
IN RE JUAN FLORES AND SAYRA FLORES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIENDS OF L.F., S.F. AND P.F., MINORS, Relators
Original Proceeding from the 192nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-060568
Before Justices Molberg , Reichek, and Goldstein
Justice Molberg dissents without opinion and would grant the writ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AMANDA L. REICHEK JUSTICE.
In their petition for writ of mandamus, relators challenge the trial court's oral ruling denying relators' motion to reconsider sixteen topics that had previously been quashed for deposition of real party in interest's corporate representative.
Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relators to show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that they lack an adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding).
Based on our review of the petition, response, reply, records on mandamus, and motions and responses filed in this proceeding, we conclude relators have failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we deny relators' petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).
Real party in interest filed a motion to deny the petition for unreasonable delay. Relator filed a motion to strike parts of real party's supplemental record. We deny the pending motions as moot.
We reviewed only that evidence that was before the trial court when it made its ruling.