Court Filings
40 filings indexedRecent court opinions cross-linked with public notices by case number, summarized and classified by AI.
In Re Bryan Stallworth v. the State of Texas
The Texas Tenth Court of Appeals denied Bryan Stallworth's original petition for a writ of mandamus. The court issued a brief memorandum opinion stating only that the petition is denied and citing the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. No published reasoning or extended analysis accompanies the denial. The decision was delivered and filed on April 30, 2026, by Chief Justice Matt Johnson for a three-judge panel.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)10-23-00400-CRIn Re Gregory G. Idom v. the State of Texas
The Texas Tenth Court of Appeals denied Gregory G. Idom’s original petition for a writ of mandamus and his emergency motion for a stay. The filing, received April 23, 2026, sought extraordinary relief from the appellate court, but the court declined to grant the requested mandamus or stay. The brief opinion contains the court's disposition without published reasoning and was issued April 24, 2026.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)10-26-00149-CVIn Re Frances Spanos Shelton v. the State of Texas
The Texas Tenth Court of Appeals considered an original petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Frances Spanos Shelton on June 26, 2025. The court reviewed the request and denied the petition. The short opinion states the procedural posture (an original mandamus proceeding), the parties, and the disposition without extended explanation or citations to legal standards or facts.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)10-25-00194-CVIn Re Randall Bolivar v. the State of Texas
The Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas denied Randall Bolivar’s pro se petition for a writ of mandamus in a Cameron County district court case. Bolivar asked the appellate court to order the trial court to perform ministerial duties of setting, hearing, and ruling on pending matters. The appellate court concluded Bolivar failed to show both a clear abuse of discretion by the trial court and the lack of an adequate appellate remedy, and he also did not supply a sufficient record as required by the mandamus rules. For these reasons, the petition was denied.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 13th District13-26-00233-CVIn Re Charles Wayne Wilson v. the State of Texas
The Texas Second Court of Appeals considered Charles Wayne Wilson’s original petition for a writ of mandamus and his request for temporary relief arising from the 235th District Court of Cooke County (trial court no. CV25-00201). In a per curiam memorandum opinion, the appellate court denied both the petition and the motion for temporary relief without an extended opinion. The court delivered its decision on April 23, 2026, leaving the trial court’s matters undisturbed and denying extraordinary relief from the appellate court.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)02-26-00247-CVIn Re Paula M. Miller v. the State of Texas
The Texas First Court of Appeals denied a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Paula M. Miller challenging a Fort Bend County Democratic Party Chairwoman’s determination that Miller was ineligible for the general election. The court explained that the relator bears the burden to file a complete appellate record demonstrating entitlement to mandamus relief under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.7(a). Because Miller did not file a complete record, the court denied mandamus relief and dismissed any pending motions as moot.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)01-26-00319-CVIn Re Jewlian Smith v. the State of Texas
The Texas Third Court of Appeals denied Jewlian Smith's petition for a writ of mandamus and dismissed as moot his emergency request for a temporary stay of trial-court proceedings. The appellate court, in a short memorandum opinion, concluded that relief by writ was not warranted and that the requested temporary stay was moot because circumstances no longer required emergency intervention. The opinion was issued as an original mandamus proceeding arising from Travis County and was filed April 23, 2026.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)03-26-00335-CVIn Re Alisa Ann Golz v. the State of Texas
The Texas Court of Appeals (Third District) denied an emergency petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Alisa Ann Golz and dismissed her emergency motion for temporary relief as moot. The court issued a short memorandum opinion without extended discussion, simply directing that the petition be denied and the temporary relief motion dismissed under the appellate rules governing emergency pleadings and relief. No further reasoning or factual findings are stated in the published entry.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)03-26-00170-CVIn Re Tamer F. Morsi v. the State of Texas
The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio denied a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Tamer F. Morsi on April 23, 2026, challenging proceedings in a Bexar County district court case. The appellate court held that Morsi did not show the trial court clearly abused its discretion or violated a duty imposed by law, nor that he lacked an adequate appellate remedy. Because the petition failed to meet the high standard for extraordinary relief, the court denied the mandamus petition and found the request for temporary relief moot.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)04-26-00334-CVIn Re Adam Horwitz v. the State of Texas
The Texas court denied the relator's petition for a writ of mandamus and all related emergency and ancillary requests. The court considered the petition, an emergency motion for temporary relief, the State's response, a motion to amend the petition, and a motion for transcript, and concluded none warranted relief. The court also lifted its prior stay of trial-court proceedings, allowing the underlying criminal case to proceed in the trial court.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)02-26-00217-CVIn Re Morgan Alyse Foster v. the State of Texas
The Court of Appeals denied Morgan Alyse Foster's petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a probate court order about control and disposition of a decedent's remains and dismissed her emergency request to stay that order as moot. Foster had sought to prohibit cremation and preserve the remains pending appellate review, but the opposing party asserted the cremation had already occurred before the petition was filed. Because the emergency relief sought was moot, the court declined to grant mandamus and denied the request for costs and attorney's fees by the real party in interest.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)01-26-00411-CVIn Re Barbara Ann Johnson v. the State of Texas
The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio denied Barbara Ann Johnson’s petition for a writ of mandamus filed April 8, 2026. The court reviewed the petition and record and concluded Johnson did not meet the standards required for mandamus relief under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. The opinion is brief, states the denial without extended discussion, and notes the underlying case is pending in the 131st Judicial District Court of Bexar County before Judge Nicole Garza.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)04-26-00289-CVIn Re Elizabeth Weston, Trustee v. the State of Texas
The Texas Court of Appeals (Third District) denied Elizabeth Weston's petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a trial-court matter originating in Comal County. The opinion is a brief memorandum order disposing of the original proceeding and denying the requested extraordinary relief under the appellate rules. No extended reasoning or factual discussion is provided in the published entry; the court issued the denial and cited the appellate rule governing disposition of such petitions.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)03-26-00322-CVIn Re Andrew Silva v. the State of Texas
The Court of Appeals (Eighth District, El Paso) denied Andrew Silva's petition for a writ of mandamus and his emergency motion for temporary relief. Silva sought to stop a county-constable eviction after a writ of possession issued, arguing the eviction turned on a bona fide title dispute and that a Rule 736 order was given improper preclusive effect. The court held Silva failed to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.3 and 52.7(a) by filing a two-page letter without required headings, record, certification, or legal citations, and therefore could not meaningfully review his conclusory claims. Because Silva did not show entitlement to extraordinary relief, the petition was denied and the emergency motion denied as moot.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)08-26-00151-CVIn Re Justin Randall Jones v. the State of Texas
The Second Court of Appeals (Fort Worth) considered Justin Randall Jones’s petition for a writ of mandamus and an emergency motion to stay a Denton County district court matter. After review, the court denied both the petition for mandamus and the emergency motion to stay. The memorandum opinion is per curiam and provides no extended reasoning or discussion of the merits; it simply states that relief is denied and the motions are dismissed on April 21, 2026.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)02-26-00245-CVIn Re Harold Dammon McCray v. the State of Texas
The Texas Second Court of Appeals considered Harold Dammon McCray’s original petition for a writ of mandamus and his request for emergency temporary relief arising from a proceeding in the County Court at Law of Cooke County. The appellate court reviewed the filings and denied both the petition for mandamus and the emergency temporary relief. The court issued a brief per curiam memorandum opinion without publishing extended reasoning, delivering its decision on April 21, 2026.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)02-26-00244-CVIn Re A.Y. v. the State of Texas
The Texas Second Court of Appeals (Fort Worth) considered a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by A.Y. seeking relief from an order of the 271st District Court of Wise County (trial court No. CV25-03-218). After review, the appellate court denied the petition and refused to grant mandamus relief. The memorandum opinion is per curiam and does not elaborate the reasoning beyond the denial; the court simply announces that relief is denied and issues no written opinion expanding on its conclusion.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)02-26-00181-CVIn Re Latonya Shand and Renford D. Balfour v. the State of Texas
The Court of Appeals (First District of Texas) denied a petition for writ of mandamus filed April 16, 2026 by Latonya Shand and Renford D. Balfour. The relators asked the court to compel the district court to rule on their combined motion for new trial, stay of judgment, and waiver of bond (allegedly filed March 27, 2026 and heard April 14, 2026). They also sought an emergency stay of execution and foreclosure proceedings in the underlying Harris County case. The court denied the mandamus petition and all related emergency relief.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)01-26-00394-CVIn Re Brian Keith Melton v. the State of Texas
The Texas Sixth Court of Appeals denied Brian Keith Melton’s petition for a writ of mandamus asking the Hunt County trial judge to rule on his motion to dismiss counsel. The court explained that mandamus requires showing no adequate remedy at law, a ministerial duty by the trial court, and a sufficient record. Melton failed to provide certified copies of his motion or a request for a ruling as required by the appellate rules, and he offered no authority showing that the trial court’s roughly thirty-day delay was unreasonable. For those reasons the petition was denied.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)06-26-00044-CRIn Re Shawn Eric McGee v. the State of Texas
The Texas Tenth Court of Appeals denied Shawn Eric McGee’s petition for a writ of mandamus filed April 10, 2026. The court issued a short memorandum opinion stating the petition is denied and that motions included with the petition are dismissed as moot. The opinion notes that the relator also attempted to file a notice of appeal in the same document and reminds that a separate notice of appeal must be filed when a proceeding becomes final in the trial court. The decision was delivered and filed April 16, 2026.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)10-26-00129-CVIn Re WC 4th and Rio Grande LP v. the State of Texas
The Texas Court of Appeals denied a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by WC 4th and Rio Grande LP in an original proceeding from Travis County. The court issued a brief memorandum opinion concluding the petition did not warrant mandamus relief and cited the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. No further explanation of the merits or factual background was provided in the published entry, and the court simply denied the requested extraordinary writ.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)03-26-00079-CVIn Re Geoji, Inc. v. the State of Texas
The Texas Third Court of Appeals denied Geoji, Inc.'s petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a trial-court action. The appellate court issued a short memorandum opinion simply stating denial and citing the appellate rule allowing such disposition. No extended reasoning, factual background, or separate opinion was included in the published entry. The decision concludes the original proceeding from Travis County without granting the extraordinary relief requested by the petitioner.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)03-26-00049-CVIn Re David Paul Shipp v. the State of Texas
The Texas Third Court of Appeals denied David Paul Shipp's petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a Williamson County court action. The opinion is a brief memorandum disposition that grants no relief and cites the appellate rule for denial. No extended reasoning or factual discussion is provided in the published entry. The petition remains unresolved in the trial court as a result of this denial, and the appellate court provided no substantive ruling on the merits.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)03-26-00260-CVIn Re Elizabeth Case v. the State of Texas
The Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth considered Elizabeth Case’s original petition for a writ of mandamus and an emergency motion seeking relief from the 393rd District Court of Denton County (trial court no. 25-3863-393). The appellate court reviewed the request and denied both the petition and the emergency motion in a per curiam memorandum opinion delivered April 15, 2026. The court provided no extended written reasoning in the memorandum opinion beyond the denial.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)02-26-00240-CVIn Re Omar Elizondo, Ovidio Elizondo, and Dr. Anthony Cynthia Elizondo Aradillas v. the State of Texas
The Fourth Court of Appeals denied a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Omar Elizondo, Ovidio Elizondo, and Dr. Anthony Cynthia Elizondo Aradillas. The petition and related motions (an emergency motion for temporary relief and a motion for expedited consideration) were filed March 24, 2026. After review, the court concluded the relators did not show entitlement to the extraordinary relief requested and therefore denied the mandamus petition; the emergency and expedited motions were denied as moot.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)04-26-00236-CVIn Re James McCoy v. the State of Texas
The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio denied James McCoy's petition for a writ of mandamus filed April 6, 2026, seeking to compel action in an underlying Bexar County district-court case. The court reviewed McCoy's petition and motions and concluded he did not meet the legal standard for mandamus relief under Texas appellate rules. As a result, the petition is denied and McCoy's ancillary motions (to proceed in forma pauperis and to accept a single copy of pleadings) were denied as moot.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)04-26-00274-CVIn Re AGON4, LLC and Texas Premium Beverage Corp. v. the State of Texas
The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio denied a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by AGON4, LLC and Texas Premium Beverage Corp. The relators sought to compel action in an underlying probate-court case but failed to show entitlement to extraordinary relief under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Because the court found the petition insufficient, it denied the writ and dismissed as moot the relators' separate motion for temporary relief (a stay of the underlying proceedings). No further reasoning beyond the procedural insufficiency is provided.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)04-26-00164-CVIn Re Jessica Marklund Johansson v. the State of Texas
The Texas Court of Appeals (Third District) denied a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Jessica Marklund Johansson. The court issued a short memorandum opinion stating only the denial and citing the appellate rule permitting such disposition. No substantive analysis or factual background appears in the opinion; the denial resolves the original mandamus proceeding brought from Travis County without granting the extraordinary relief sought.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)03-26-00286-CVIn Re Tereza Kacerova v. the State of Texas
The Texas Third Court of Appeals, in an original mandamus proceeding arising from Travis County, denied the petition for a writ of mandamus. The court issued a brief memorandum opinion concluding the petitioner was not entitled to the extraordinary relief sought and cited the appellate rule governing disposition. No further explanation or relief was provided in the opinion, and the denial resolves the petition without granting any mandamus relief.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)03-26-00318-CVIn Re Sonny Delgado v. the State of Texas
The Texas Third Court of Appeals denied Sonny Delgado's petition for a writ of mandamus and dismissed his emergency motion for temporary relief as moot. The court issued a brief memorandum opinion stating only the disposition and citing the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. No substantive opinion or reasoning was provided in the document beyond the procedural rulings and the filing date.
OtherDeniedTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)03-26-00330-CV