In Re Adelaide Vivian Leblanc v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 19, 2024
• Docket: 01-24-00904-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued December 19, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00904-CV ——————————— IN RE ADELAIDE VIVIAN LEBLANC, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, Adelaide Vivian Leblanc, filed a petition for writ of mandamus

challenging “three separate temporary orders rendered in connection with each

other” by the trial court, including a: (1) June 14, 2024 “Default Order Denying

[Relator’s] Special Appearance, Plea to the Jurisdiction, Request for the Court to

Decline Jurisdiction, and Alternative Motion for Stay of Proceedings Pending

[Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (the “UCCJEA”)]

Conference”; (2) October 11, 2024 “Temporary Orders in Suit Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship”; and (3) November 1, 2024 “Order on [Real Party in

Interest’s] Request for Attorney’s Fees.”1 Relator requested that this Court “find the

Texas trial court clearly abused [its] discretion [by] denying the plea to the

jurisdiction” and by “awarding interim attorney’s fees and expenses to [real party in

interest] in connection with responding to [relator’s] jurisdictional challenges.” The

mandamus petition further requested that the Court “render the trial court’s

temporary orders as void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, in order to allow the

home state of North Carolina to exercise its home state jurisdiction in conformity

with the UCCJEA.”

In connection with her mandamus petition, relator also filed a “Motion for

Emergency Temporary Relief and for Expedited Consideration.” In her motion,

relator requested that the Court stay enforcement of the trial court’s October 11, 2024

temporary orders and “any future proceedings relating” to the underlying trial court

proceedings pending this Court’s consideration of her petition for writ of mandamus.

We conclude that relator has failed to establish she is entitled to mandamus

relief, and therefore, the Court denies relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and

her “Motion for Emergency Temporary Relief and for Expedited Consideration.”

We dismiss any other pending motions as moot.

1 The underlying case is In the Interest of A.R.T. and Unborn Child, Children, Cause No. 2024-18697, in the 257th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Sandra Peake presiding. The real party in interest is Walter Edward Thomas, II.

2 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Hightower, and Guerra.