Court Filings

The Court of Appeals (Sixth District) denied Jeffrey Don Brock's petition for a writ of mandamus asking the county court judge to rule on his motion to compel an executor's accounting. Brock had demanded an accounting by March 16, 2026, but filed for mandamus on March 10, before that deadline expired. The executor filed a verified accounting on March 13 (with clerk acceptance disputed by Brock). The court held Brock was not entitled to extraordinary relief because he sought mandamus before the accounting deadline and did not show the trial court refused to rule on his later complaints about the accounting.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department denied plaintiff-appellant Hoi Trinh's motion for reargument or for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals in his action against defendant-respondent Joseph Thien Nguyen. The court's one-paragraph memorandum and order, issued April 24, 2026, simply denies both requested forms of relief, leaving the prior appellate disposition in place and refusing further review by the state's highest court or reconsideration by this panel.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department denied plaintiff James R. Caputo’s motion for reargument or for permission to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals in his action against multiple defendants including Nathan Holt and others. The court issued a brief memorandum and order on April 24, 2026, declining both reliefs without published opinion. No change was made to the underlying appellate disposition by this decision; the motion was simply denied.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, denied the plaintiff's motion for reargument and denied leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals in the case where Joseph D. Burgdorf sought further review of a prior decision against Betsy Ross Nursing and Rehabilitation Center and various individual defendants. The court affirmed its earlier disposition by refusing to revisit the matter or permit an appeal to New York’s highest court. No extended opinion or new legal analysis was provided in this memorandum and order.

Justice Young dissented from the Court’s denial of a petition for writ of mandamus by Warwick Construction, Bustamante Construction, and DLC General Construction Services. The relators asked the trial court for limited reopening of discovery under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 190.5(b); the trial court denied that request and the relators sought mandamus relief. Justice Young would have stayed the upcoming trial so the Court could fully consider whether the denial of discovery implicated Rule 190.5(b) and risked mooting review. He explains that proceeding to trial could vitiate relators’ ability to present their case and waste judicial resources if an appellate remedy were later required.

The Court of Appeals (Thirteenth District) denied Randall Bolivar’s petition for a writ of mandamus challenging several trial-court actions in cause no. 2021-DCL-05478. Bolivar argued the trial court abused its discretion by not deeming requests for admission admitted, by failing to provide notice and hearings on six motions, and by not signing a nonsuit order. The court held that mandamus is extraordinary relief and that Bolivar failed to meet his burden to show both a clear abuse of discretion and lack of an adequate appellate remedy, and the record provided was insufficient to support mandamus relief.

The Georgia Court of Appeals denied Jeremy Knowles's emergency motion for a stay of enforcement because he had not filed a notice of appeal in the trial court. Although Knowles's application for discretionary review was granted on March 10, 2026, he was given ten days to file a notice of appeal and the court confirmed no notice had been filed in DeKalb County Superior Court. Because there was no notice to operate as a supersedeas of the trial court’s final order, the Court declined to use its emergency stay power under its rules and denied the motion.

The Georgia Court of Appeals considered an Application for Discretionary Appeal in case A26D0443, Nancy Pierce Jo Jenkins v. Michelle Jenkins, arising from Liberty County case number 24CV002090. The court issued a short order dated April 23, 2026, denying the application for discretionary appeal. No opinion or reasoning beyond the denial was provided in the extract; the court simply ordered that the application be denied and the Clerk certified the minutes.

The Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas denied Houston Pipe Line Company LP's petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to vacate a trial court order that granted a plea to the jurisdiction. The appellate court declined to disturb the trial court's decision, lifted its prior stay issued October 7, 2025, and dismissed any pending motions as moot. The court issued a short per curiam memorandum opinion denying relief without extended discussion.

The Texas Court of Appeals (Third District) denied a petition for a writ of mandamus brought by Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and TD Ameritrade, Inc. challenging a lower-court action in Travis County. The court issued a short memorandum opinion simply stating the petition is denied and citing the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. No extended reasoning or factual background appears in the document; the decision is a procedural denial of extraordinary relief rather than a merits ruling on underlying claims.

The Court of Appeals (Eighth District) denied Levi Hardy’s petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a successor judge’s order granting a new trial in a divorce case after a three-day bench trial. Levi argued the successor judge (who did not preside over the bench trial) abused discretion by granting a new trial without receiving evidence or stating reasons. The court declined to extend Texas mandamus precedent that allows merits review of new-trial orders after jury trials to new-trial orders following bench trials, concluding extraordinary circumstances were not shown and that a prompt retrial here outweighed the harms of interlocutory review.

The El Paso Court of Appeals denied a petition for mandamus seeking to overturn a probate court order disqualifying attorney Tony Aguilar from representing the estate of Judith Wheatley. The court held that Aguilar’s deposition and other evidence showed he was likely an essential fact witness about how six deeds conveying the Poki Roni Ranch came to be in Judy’s possession. Because his testimony could be necessary and adverse to Travis’s estate, the trial court did not clearly abuse its discretion in disqualifying him under the advocate-witness rule. The court therefore refused to grant extraordinary mandamus relief.

The Fourth Court of Appeals denied CPS Energy's petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a trial court's denial of its motion for protective order and the overruling of objections to a subpoena directed at non-party Dimension Energy Services in a pending Bexar County case. The appellate court held CPS Energy failed to preserve necessary factual issues for mandamus review and also noted an adequate alternative remedy exists because Dimension has filed its own protective-order motion in the trial court. The court therefore declined to consider new evidence or arguments raised for the first time on mandamus and denied relief.

The Georgia Court of Appeals considered an Application for Discretionary Appeal filed by Staff Care 247, LLC (A26D0450) in a case identified by superior court number SPCV2400123. On April 21, 2026, the Court issued an order denying the application. The document is a short administrative order certifying that the discretionary appeal will not be heard by the Court of Appeals; it contains no further explanation or legal reasoning.

The Georgia Court of Appeals issued an order on April 20, 2026 denying the appellant Dorrin Johnson's emergency motion for a stay of enforcement pending appeal in the matter captioned Johnson v. Molleda. The court declined to pause enforcement of the underlying judgment or order while the appeal proceeds. The decision is a brief administrative disposition denying the requested temporary relief without extended explanation in the excerpt provided.

The Georgia Court of Appeals considered an application for discretionary appeal in the case Samuel Kwushue v. City of Atlanta and denied the application. The order is brief: the Court of Appeals reviewed the application and entered an order denying it on April 20, 2026. No opinion or reasoning is provided in the document; the entry is a procedural disposition that leaves the lower-court decision in place and does not grant further review by this court.

The Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas denied Beverly Brooks's emergency petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a trial-court order dated April 13, 2026. Brooks sought to prevent counsel Kirkendall Dwyer, LLP from withdrawing all funds held in the trial court's registry and to secure a portion of the registry funds representing accrued interest. The appeals court declined relief and left the trial court's order intact, which granted withdrawal of the full registry amount to Kirkendall Dwyer and denied Brooks's request for interest funds.

The Texas Supreme Court denied review of an appeal in an asbestos wrongful-death case involving Howmet Aerospace and the Burford family. Justice Young concurred in the denial while criticizing the court of appeals for rejecting a prior Texas Supreme Court statement that proof of dose is required even in single-source asbestos-exposure cases. He explained the factual posture (long-term household exposure from a worker’s contaminated clothes), summarized relevant precedent (Havner, Flores, Bostic), and said that although lower courts show confusion, this particular case cannot resolve the dose question because the court of appeals found the plaintiffs had produced sufficient proof of dose. He urged future review in an appropriate case.

The Georgia Court of Appeals considered an Application for Discretionary Appeal filed by Catherine Corkren in case A26D0426 concerning LC No. 19CV0611. After review, the court issued a short administrative order denying the application. The document contains no substantive opinion explaining the court's reasoning beyond the single-word disposition denying the request for discretionary review.

The Georgia Court of Appeals issued a short order denying the appellant's motion made under Court of Appeals Rule 40(b) in case A26E0180, Fontes v. Bloom. The order contains no extended explanation or factual findings — it simply states the motion is denied and is certified as an official extract of the court minutes. There is no discussion of the grounds for denial or any further relief granted.

The Georgia Court of Appeals denied Andrea Plummer’s emergency motion seeking a stay of enforcement while her application for discretionary appeal is considered. The court issued a short order on April 15, 2026, declining to pause enforcement of the underlying judgment or order pending further appellate review. No extended reasoning or citation of law appears in the order; it is a procedural disposition denying temporary relief requested by the movant.

The Court of Appeals denied a petition for a writ of mandamus from Anjeneya Vijay Cheruvu, who sought to overturn a March 19, 2026 trial-court order holding him in contempt for possession or access in a Fort Bend County child-protection case. Cheruvu argued the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter the contempt order. The appellate court concluded he did not meet the heavy burden required for mandamus relief, so it refused to direct the trial court to vacate the contempt order and dismissed any pending motions as moot.

The Georgia Court of Appeals denied FPL Foods, LLC's application for discretionary appeal in the case FPL Foods, LLC et al v. Terrie Martinez-Tello. The order is brief: the court considered the application and denied it, which means the intermediate court's decision stands and the Court of Appeals will not review the matter on the discretionary docket. No substantive reasoning or opinion explaining the denial is provided in the document.

The Georgia Court of Appeals issued an order on April 13, 2026, denying Maria Theresa Pagano's emergency motion for a stay pending appeal in her case against Citizens Bank, N.A. The order is brief and procedural: the court considered the emergency motion and declined to grant a stay. No accompanying opinion explaining the court's reasoning or factual findings was provided in the document.

The court denied a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Anderson & Associates, PLLC seeking to overturn a trial court order of December 5, 2025 that redistributed an attorney fee award. The court explained mandamus requires showing both that the trial court abused its discretion and that there is no adequate remedy by appeal, or that the order is void. The court concluded the relator has an adequate remedy by appeal, withdrew its prior order requesting responses from the real parties in interest, and denied the petition and emergency relief.

The Georgia Court of Appeals considered an application for discretionary appeal by Xiaodong Guan from a civil action (LC No. 25CV000342) and denied the application on April 10, 2026. The order is brief and purely procedural: the court exercised its discretion and declined to grant review, so no merits decision on the underlying dispute between the named parties was made. The denial leaves the lower court's judgment or order intact and concludes this court's involvement unless the applicant pursues another available remedy.

Justice Young filed a short opinion respecting the Court’s denial of rehearing in a petition for review concerning the Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (TUFTA). He explains that the Court has rarely authoritatively construed TUFTA and that many lower and federal courts have had to make independent interpretations. Justice Young concluded this particular case is a poor vehicle to resolve the broader statutory question—whether terminating a contract right to future payments can be a fraudulent transfer—because the record is highly fact-specific. For those reasons the Court denied rehearing and declined to take the case for further guidance on TUFTA.

The First District of Texas denied a mandamus petition filed by May Kue and Youssef Ezzat challenging a county court’s final judgment in an eviction case. The relators asked the court to issue an emergency stay blocking a writ of possession, further proceedings in the underlying eviction, and release of registry funds. The Court of Appeals denied the petition and all related emergency motions and stay requests without granting the requested relief.

The Texas Court of Appeals (First District) denied Kevin Henry's petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a trial court order that granted an opponent's motion to compel discovery in a pending civil case (Derrick Dees v. Kevin Henry et al.). The appellate court concluded mandamus relief was not warranted and dismissed any outstanding motions as moot. The opinion is a short per curiam memorandum without extended factual or legal discussion, and it leaves the trial court's order intact.

The Texas First Court of Appeals denied a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Anant Kumar Tripati challenging a trial court order that granted a motion to dismiss in an underlying suit against YESCARE Corp. and others. The appellate court concluded mandamus relief was not warranted and dismissed any pending motions as moot. The opinion is brief and issued per curiam, listing the underlying district-court cause and judge but providing no extended reasoning or factual detail.