From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Kennedy

Court of Appeals of Texas, Twelfth District, Tyler
May 21, 2008
No. 12-08-00205-CV (Tex. App. May. 21, 2008)

Opinion

No. 12-08-00205-CV

Opinion delivered May 21, 2008.

Original Proceeding.

Panel consisted of WORTHEN, C.J., GRIFFITH, J., and HOYLE, J.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Michael Kennedy seeks a writ of mandamus requiring "the district court" to appoint a judge to decide a civil rights lawsuit that Kennedy alleges he has filed in which he names all of the Anderson County district judges as parties.

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and was intended to be available "only in situations involving manifest and urgent necessity and not for grievances that may be addressed by other remedies." Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 840 (Tex. 1992). For Kennedy to be entitled to relief by mandamus, he must meet two requirements. First, he must show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion. See id. Second, he must show that he lacks an adequate remedy at law, such as an ordinary appeal. See id.

Kennedy's mandamus petition contains no factual allegations supporting his request for relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(g). Moreover, his petition does not include an appendix, see Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j)(1)(A), and is not accompanied by a record. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a)(1). Consequently, we are unable to conclude that "the district court" has abused its discretion. Kennedy's petition for writ of mandamus is denied .


Summaries of

In re Kennedy

Court of Appeals of Texas, Twelfth District, Tyler
May 21, 2008
No. 12-08-00205-CV (Tex. App. May. 21, 2008)
Case details for

In re Kennedy

Case Details

Full title:IN RE: MICHAEL KENNEDY, RELATOR

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Twelfth District, Tyler

Date published: May 21, 2008

Citations

No. 12-08-00205-CV (Tex. App. May. 21, 2008)

Citing Cases

Kennedy v. Steen

Therefore, appellees contend, the 3rd and 349th District Courts were never parties to this suit. See In re…