Enexco, Inc. v. James Staley, II

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 21, 2016
Docket05-15-01047-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Enexco, Inc. v. James Staley, II (Enexco, Inc. v. James Staley, II) 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
Enexco, Inc. v. James Staley, II, (Tex. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Writ of Prohibition Conditionally Granted and Opinion and Order Filed June 21, 2016

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-15-01047-CV

ENEXCO, INC., APPELLANT

V.

JAMES STALEY, II, ET AL., APPELLEES

On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-09177

Before Chief Justice Carolyn Wright and Justices Elizabeth Lang-Miers and Craig Stoddart

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Appellees request a writ staying proceedings in Cause No. C-15-31118 pending in the

145th Judicial District Court of Nacogdoches County, Texas pending disposition of the above-

styled appeal. Appellees seek a stay of the Nacogdoches proceedings because the claims and

parties are identical to those currently before this Court in this appeal. We conclude that the

Nacogdoches proceeding must be stayed to prevent interference with this Court’s jurisdiction in

deciding this pending appeal.

This Court has jurisdiction to issue all writs necessary to enforce the Court’s jurisdiction.

TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.221(a); In re Herrera, No. 05-14-00394-CV, 2014 WL 1477922, at *1

(Tex. App.—Dallas Apr. 14, 2014, orig. proceeding). A writ of prohibition may be issued 1 whenever an inferior court seeks to try a case involving the same parties and issues as a case

presently on appeal. Beckham v. Topper, 652 S.W.2d 507, 509 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1983, no

writ) (citing Bell v. Young, 20 S.W.2d 135 (Tex. Civ. App.—Waco 1929, no writ)).

Here, the pending appeal and the Nacogdoches suit involve the same parties and same

issues. As such, the prosecution of the Nacogdoches suit will interfere with the jurisdiction of

this Court in this appeal.

We CONDITIONALLY GRANT Appellees’ motion and ORDER the 145th Judicial

District Court of Nacogdoches County, Texas to take no further action in Cause No. C-15-31118

other than staying or abating Cause No. C-15-31118 pending further order from this Court. The

writ of prohibition will issue only if the district court takes other action in Cause No. C-15-

31118. Since we assume that the Nacogdoches district court will comply with this opinion, we

direct our clerk not to issue the writ of prohibition unless information is received that the district

court is proceeding with the suit.

Writ of prohibition conditionally granted.

PER CURIAM

151047F.U05

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

Related

Bell v. Young
20 S.W.2d 135 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1929)
Beckham v. Topper
652 S.W.2d 507 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Enexco, Inc. v. James Staley, II, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/enexco-inc-v-james-staley-ii-texapp-2016.