Opinion
No. 13-09-00268-CV
Opinion delivered and filed May 18, 2009.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
Memorandum Opinion PER CURIAM.
Before Chief Justice VALDEZ and Justices GARZA and VELA.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Barry Dwayne Minnfee, pro se, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on May 14, 2009, asking this Court to direct the "trial court to respond to Intentional Tort filed April 20, 2009 with Clerk Patsy Perez District Court."
We deny the petition for writ of mandamus for the reasons stated herein. First, the petition for writ of mandamus fails to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See generally Tex. R. App. P. 52.3. Specifically, for instance, the petition lacks an appendix and a record, fails to contain a "clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities and to the appendix or record," and is largely illegible. See id. 52.3(h). Second, relator has not demonstrated that the trial court expressly refused to rule on relator's "Intentional Tort" or that an unreasonable amount of time has passed since that document was filed. See In re Dimas, 88 S.W.3d 349, 351 (Tex.App. 2002, orig. proceeding); In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex.App. 2001, orig. proceeding); Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex.App. 1992, orig. proceeding); accord O'Connor v. First Ct. of Appeals, 837 S.W.2d 94, 97 (Tex. 1992) (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. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).