In re Union Pac. R.R.

Full title: IN RE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Tenth District, Waco

Date published: Jan 28, 2004

No. 10-03-275-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 28, 2004)

Opinion

No. 10-03-275-CV.

Opinion delivered and filed January 28, 2004.

Original Proceeding.

Writ dismissed as moot.

Attorney(s) for Appellant: Deborah A. Newman, Forman, Perry, Watkins, Krutz Tardy, L.L.P., Houston, TX.

Kathleen H. Alsina, Phelps Dunbar, L.L.P., Houston, TX.

Attorney(s) for Appellee: Steven L. Moody, Naman, Howell, Smith Lee, P.C., Waco, TX.

Michael A. Zimmerman, Zimmerman, Zimmerman, Cotner Young, Waco, TX.

James R. Dunnam, Dunnam Dunnam, L.L.P., Waco, TX.

Charles W. McDonald, McDonald Williams, P.C., Waco, TX.

Before Chief Justice GRAY, Justice VANCE, and Justice REYNA.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

TOM GRAY, Chief Justice.

Relator, Union Pacific Railroad Company, filed a petition for writ of mandamus, asking this Court to compel the trial court to vacate its order of July 7, 2003, and order that the Naman Howell law firm and the Zimmerman law firm are disqualified from representing the plaintiffs in the underlying cause of action. On September 29, 2003, we received notice that Union Pacific had removed the underlying case to federal court. We have received nothing further from the parties to this mandamus.

Because the trial court may not proceed further with the underlying case unless and until the cause is remanded from the federal district court, we cannot give Union Pacific the relief it seeks; that is, compel the trial court to disqualify the law firms. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 1446(d) (West 1994). Directing the court to vacate its order and enter another order could have no practical effect. When this Court cannot take any action that can effect the requested relief, and thus the order will have no practical result, we must dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus as moot. Dow Chemical Co. v. Garcia, 909 S.W.2d 503, 505 (Tex. 1995); In re Manchester Tank Equip. Co., No. 06-03-00068-CV, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 5036, at *1 (Tex. App.-Texarkana June 12, 2003, no pet. h.); In re Gill, No. 06-03-00063-CV, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 4868, at *2 (Tex. App.-Texarkana June 11, 2003, no pet. h.).

Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed as moot.