From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Stanford

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Aug 14, 2017
No. 05-17-00551-CV (Tex. App. Aug. 14, 2017)

Opinion

No. 05-17-00551-CV No. 05-17-00552-CV

08-14-2017

IN RE CHAD G. STANFORD, TED L. GLASSMAN, TURBINE ASSET HOLDINGS, LLC, TURBINE ASSET HOLDINGS GROUP, LLC AND JSS HOLDINGS GROUP, LLC, Relators


Original Proceeding from the 298th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. DC-16-07658 and DF-16-07714

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Bridges, Fillmore, and Schenck
Opinion by Justice Bridges

In this original proceeding, relators complain that the trial court denied their motion to consolidate two cases for trial. To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Based on the record before us, we conclude relators have not shown they are entitled to the relief requested. Accordingly, we deny relators' petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a) (the court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief sought).

/David L. Bridges/

DAVID L. BRIDGES

JUSTICE 170551F.P05


Summaries of

In re Stanford

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Aug 14, 2017
No. 05-17-00551-CV (Tex. App. Aug. 14, 2017)
Case details for

In re Stanford

Case Details

Full title:IN RE CHAD G. STANFORD, TED L. GLASSMAN, TURBINE ASSET HOLDINGS, LLC…

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: Aug 14, 2017

Citations

No. 05-17-00551-CV (Tex. App. Aug. 14, 2017)