In Re Aaron Nicholas Thomas v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Aaron Nicholas Thomas v. the State of Texas (In Re Aaron Nicholas Thomas v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
__________________
NO. 09-25-00490-CV __________________
IN RE AARON NICHOLAS THOMAS
__________________________________________________________________
Original Proceeding County Court at Law No. 3 of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 25-09-14607 __________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In a petition for a writ of mandamus, Relator Aaron Nicholas Thomas
contends the trial court failed to perform its ministerial duty to issue service
documents for a petition for a protective order.1 The clerk of the court, not the judge,
has the duty to issue citation.2 See Tex. Fam. Code. Ann. § 82.042(a).
1 Relator submitted a mandamus petition that contains multiple format deficiencies. He failed to correct the deficiencies after the Clerk of the Court provided notice and an opportunity to cure. We use Rule 2, however, to look beyond the deficiencies to reach an expeditious result. See Tex. R. App. P. 2. 2 An intermediate appellate court lacks mandamus jurisdiction over a County Clerk unless necessary to protect the appellate court’s jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221. 1 Relator additionally complains that the trial court abused its discretion by
failing to authorize an alternative method of service. See generally Tex. R. Civ. P.
106(b). “To meet the due process threshold reflected in Rule 106(b)(2), a party
resorting to substitute service must produce evidence showing his selected method
was reasonably calculated to apprise a party of the suit.” JD Auto Corp. v. Bell, 697
S.W.3d 441, 457 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2024, no pet.). After reviewing the mandamus
petition and appendix, we conclude Relator has not shown that he provided the trial
court with sufficient support for his request for alternative service of citation.
Accordingly, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P.
52.8(a). We deny Relator’s requests for temporary relief. See id. 52.10(a).
PETITION DENIED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on January 7, 2026 Opinion Delivered January 8, 2026
Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Aaron Nicholas Thomas v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-aaron-nicholas-thomas-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp9-2026.