From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

IN RE LEOPOLDO LEAL

Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg
Aug 4, 2010
No. 13-10-00434-CV (Tex. App. Aug. 4, 2010)

Opinion

No. 13-10-00434-CV

Delivered and filed August 4, 2010.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

Before Chief Justice VALDEZ and Justices YAÑEZ and GARZA.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Relator, Leopoldo Leal, filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in the foregoing cause on August 2, 2010, in which he requests this Court to compel the respondent, the Honorable Nelva Gonzales Ramos, presiding judge of the 347th District Court of Nueces County, to vacate her July 7, 2010 order in trial court cause number 10-1868-H. The July 7, 2010 order: (1) declares relator to be a vexatious litigant; and (2) orders him to pay security in the amount of $24,000 on or before July 20, 2010.

See TEX. CIV. PRAC. REM. CODE ANN. §§ 11.051, 11.055 (Vernon 2002). We note that we have construed relator's petition liberally, as it fails to meet the requirements specified in the rules of appellate procedure. See generally TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3. We also note that relator has previously filed petitions which failed to comply with applicable requirements. See, e.g., In re Leal, No. 13-10-102-CV, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 1622, at **1-2 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi Mar. 4, 2010) (per curiam) (orig. proceeding).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, is of the opinion that relator has not shown himself entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED.


Summaries of

IN RE LEOPOLDO LEAL

Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg
Aug 4, 2010
No. 13-10-00434-CV (Tex. App. Aug. 4, 2010)
Case details for

IN RE LEOPOLDO LEAL

Case Details

Full title:IN RE: LEOPOLDO LEAL

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg

Date published: Aug 4, 2010

Citations

No. 13-10-00434-CV (Tex. App. Aug. 4, 2010)

Citing Cases

LEAL v. KING RANCH

The Court has previously considered two petitions for writ of mandamus filed by appellant arising from this…