Court Filings

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.

The Court of Appeals of the Sixth Appellate District (Texarkana) denied John Henry Garber’s petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order forcing the Delta County court to rule on multiple pro se pretrial motions in three misdemeanor cases. The court found the record Garber supplied inadequate to show he had a clear, ministerial right to the relief because the registers show he failed to appear at a December 16, 2024 hearing and a warrant issued; there is no record he was re-arrested or returned to custody. The court emphasized mandamus requires a complete record and that a relator must show a clear right to relief, which Garber did not do.

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 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.

The Texas Third Court of Appeals denied Jeffrey Lee Gaston’s pro se petition requesting habeas and mandamus relief to compel speedy trial on pending Hays County charges. The court found jurisdictional and procedural defects: Gaston filed in the wrong court, failed to supply the certified record or supporting documents required for mandamus or habeas review, and cited authorities showing his usual remedy is direct appeal rather than pretrial habeas. Because he did not meet his burden to show entitlement to extraordinary relief, the court denied the petition without prejudice.

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 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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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 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.

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.

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 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.

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.

The Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, denied Margaret Hosseini Browder's petition for a writ of habeas corpus and denied as moot her motion for an emergency stay. Browder filed the habeas petition on April 8, 2026, and an emergency stay motion on April 20, 2026. After considering the petition, motion, and appendix, the court concluded she had not shown entitlement to relief under the applicable appellate rules and therefore denied the petition; because the petition was denied, the stay motion was moot.

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 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.

The Texas Court of Appeals (Third District) denied the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services' petition for a writ of mandamus and dismissed its motion for temporary emergency relief as moot. The court issued a short memorandum opinion resolving the original mandamus proceeding from Travis County without further opinion. The denial means the appellate court declined to order the lower court or official to take the specific action the Department sought; the emergency motion was unnecessary following that disposition.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.