From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Venkatraman

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
May 19, 2017
No. 05-17-00489-CV (Tex. App. May. 19, 2017)

Opinion

No. 05-17-00489-CV

05-19-2017

IN RE VENKY VENKATRAMAN, Relator


Original Proceeding from the 255th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DF-04-11968

MEMORANDUM OPINION

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

Before the Court is relator's May 10, 2017 petition for writ of mandamus in which he complains of the trial court's protective order quashing a trial subpoena issued by relator. 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 relator has not shown he is 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).

/Robert M. Fillmore/

ROBERT M. FILLMORE

JUSTICE 170489F.P05


Summaries of

In re Venkatraman

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
May 19, 2017
No. 05-17-00489-CV (Tex. App. May. 19, 2017)
Case details for

In re Venkatraman

Case Details

Full title:IN RE VENKY VENKATRAMAN, Relator

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: May 19, 2017

Citations

No. 05-17-00489-CV (Tex. App. May. 19, 2017)

Citing Cases

In re S.V.

orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (same); In re Venkatraman, No. 05-17-01330-CV, 2017 WL 5622930 (Tex. App.-…

In re S.V.

p.) (denying mandamus relief); In re Venkatraman, No. 05-17-01474-CV, 2018 WL 329363 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan.…