What did the court decide?

The court denied the relators’ petition for writ of mandamus and denied their emergency requests for stays and other relief.

Who is affected by this decision?

The relators (May Kue and Youssef Ezzat) and the eviction case parties, including Cecilia Casino, are directly affected; the county court’s judgment may proceed.

Does this decision stop the eviction or release of funds?

No. The appeals court denied the requested emergency stay, so the county court may proceed with execution of the writ of possession and other steps subject to any other relief the relators might obtain.

Can this be appealed or challenged further?

Relators may consider other legal avenues, such as filing a petition for rehearing in this court if available or pursuing relief in another appropriate court, but this opinion denied mandamus and stays.

In Re May Kue and Youssef Ezzat v. the State of Texas

Docket 01-26-00331-CV

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

CivilDenied

Filed: Apr 9, 2026 · 3 weeks ago
Jurisdiction: Texas
Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Type: Lead Opinion
Case type: Civil
Disposition: Denied
Docket: 01-26-00331-CV

Original proceeding: petition for writ of mandamus seeking to overturn a county court final judgment in an eviction action and to obtain emergency stays.

Summary

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.

Issues Decided

Whether relators were entitled to mandamus relief from the county court’s final eviction judgment
Whether an emergency stay should issue to prevent execution of a writ of possession, further proceedings in the underlying case, or release of funds from the county court’s registry

Court's Reasoning

The court reviewed the mandamus petition and related emergency stay requests and concluded the relators were not entitled to the extraordinary relief sought. Because the opinion is a short memorandum denying the petition, it does not elaborate on legal analysis but reflects the court’s determination that the conditions for mandamus relief or an emergency stay were not satisfied.

Parties

Relator: May Kue
Relator: Youssef Ezzat
Respondent: Cecilia Casino
Judge: Manpreet Monica Singh

Key Dates

County court final judgment signed: 2026-04-01
Court of Appeals opinion issued: 2026-04-09

What You Should Do Next

1
Consult an attorney immediately
Relators should contact counsel to evaluate options, including potential rehearing, appeal, or emergency relief in another court, and to confirm timelines for further filings.
2
Verify status of writ and registry funds
Confirm with the county court clerk whether a writ of possession has been issued or executed and whether registry funds have been released, so counsel can seek any available emergency intervention.
3
Consider filing alternative motions
If appropriate, file motions in the county court to stay execution, to seek relief based on procedural or substantive issues, or to preserve record for appellate review.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?: The court denied the relators’ petition for writ of mandamus and denied their emergency requests for stays and other relief.
Who is affected by this decision?: The relators (May Kue and Youssef Ezzat) and the eviction case parties, including Cecilia Casino, are directly affected; the county court’s judgment may proceed.
Does this decision stop the eviction or release of funds?: No. The appeals court denied the requested emergency stay, so the county court may proceed with execution of the writ of possession and other steps subject to any other relief the relators might obtain.
Can this be appealed or challenged further?: Relators may consider other legal avenues, such as filing a petition for rehearing in this court if available or pursuing relief in another appropriate court, but this opinion denied mandamus and stays.

The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.

Full Filing Text

Opinion issued April 9, 2026




                                      In The

                               Court of Appeals
                                      For The

                          First District of Texas
                             ————————————
                               NO. 01-26-00331-CV
                            ———————————
             IN RE MAY KUE AND YOUSSEF EZZAT, Relators



            Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus


                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Relators May Kue and Youssef Ezzat filed a petition for writ of mandamus

challenging the final judgment signed by the county court on April 1, 2026, in the

underlying eviction action.1 The petition includes a request that this Court order an

emergency stay of (1) the issuance or execution of any writ of possession, (2) all



1
      The underlying case is Cecilia Casino v. May Kue, Youssef Ezzat, and All Other
      Occupants, cause number 1270307, pending in the County Civil Court at Law No.
      4 of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Manpreet Monica Singh presiding.
further proceedings in the underlying case, and (3) the release of funds held in the

county court’s registry, pending resolution of the petition. We deny the petition. All

pending motions and requests for relief related to the petition, including Relators’

requests for a stay, are denied.

                                   PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Rivas-Molloy, Johnson, and Dokupil.




                                          2