Amateur Athletic Foundation v. Hoffman

893 S.W.2d 602, 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 3273, 1994 WL 708085
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 16, 1994
Docket05-94-01852-CV
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 893 S.W.2d 602 (Amateur Athletic Foundation v. Hoffman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Amateur Athletic Foundation v. Hoffman, 893 S.W.2d 602, 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 3273, 1994 WL 708085 (Tex. Ct. App. 1994).

Opinions

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BAKER, Justice.

Respondent, a visiting judge sitting in the County Court of Law No. 4 of Dallas County, Texas, denied Relator’s timely filed objection to Respondent as a visiting judge. Relator requests we order Respondent to vacate all orders he entered after Relator filed its objection and disqualify himself from any further proceedings in the underlying litigation. Once a party makes a timely objection to a visiting judge, .the assigned judge’s disqualification is mandatory. We conditionally grant the writ.

FACTS

In this case, the record reflects Relator filed a timely objection to Respondent’s assignment as a visiting judge to hear a matter involving Relator’s pending case. Respondent overruled Relator’s objection and over the objection proceeded to hear the Real Party In Interest’s motion. The Respondent later entered orders based upon the hearing.

APPLICATION OF LAW TO FACTS

The applicable law is clear and settled. Once a party makes a timely objection, [603]*603the assigned judge’s disqualification is mandatory. Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 74.053(a)-(c) (Vernon Supp.1994); Rubin v. Hoffman, 843 S.W.2d 658, 659 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1992, orig. proceeding); Lewis v. Leftwich, 775 S.W.2d 848, 851 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1989, orig. proceeding).

An objection is timely under the government code if made before the assigned judge, sitting on the bench and in open court, calls the case to hearing or to trial. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 74.053(c) (Vernon Supp. 1994); Rubin, 843 S.W.2d at 659; Lewis, 775 S.W.2d at 850.

Any later order issued by the assigned judge is a nullity. Rubin, 843 S.W.2d at 659; Lewis, 775 S.W.2d at 851. Because the assigned judge’s orders are void, a Relator can secure mandamus relief without showing he has no adequate remedy at law. Rubin, 843 S.W.2d at 659; Lewis, 775 S.W.2d at 851.

The record shows that Relator’s objection was timely. Any order Respondent entered as the assigned judge is a nullity. We conditionally grant Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

in Re: Brenda L. Caddell
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2022
in Re Magnolia Property Management
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2020
Favaloro v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline
13 S.W.3d 831 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000)
Dunn v. Street
938 S.W.2d 33 (Texas Supreme Court, 1997)
Flores v. Banner
932 S.W.2d 500 (Texas Supreme Court, 1996)
Perkins v. Groff
936 S.W.2d 661 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1996)
Texas Employment Commission v. Alvarez
915 S.W.2d 161 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1996)
South Main Bank v. Wittig
909 S.W.2d 243 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Vance v. Davidson
903 S.W.2d 863 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Amateur Athletic Foundation v. Hoffman
893 S.W.2d 602 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
893 S.W.2d 602, 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 3273, 1994 WL 708085, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amateur-athletic-foundation-v-hoffman-texapp-1994.