In Re Alan Eoff v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Alan Eoff v. the State of Texas (In Re Alan Eoff v. the State of Texas) 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.
Opinion
NUMBER 13-23-00069-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
IN RE ALAN EOFF
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Benavides, Tijerina, and Peña Memorandum Opinion by Justice Peña1
On February 21, 2023, relator Alan Eoff, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ
of mandamus through which he asserts that the trial court abused its discretion by issuing
monetary sanctions against him, ordering a child custody evaluation report to be filed
under seal, and appointing an ad litem for a minor child to serve in the dual role of
1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not
required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). guardian ad litem and attorney ad litem.
Mandamus is an extraordinary and discretionary remedy. See In re Allstate Indem.
Co., 622 S.W.3d 870, 883 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding); In re Garza, 544 S.W.3d 836,
840 (Tex. 2018) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148
S.W.3d 124, 138 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). To obtain relief by writ of mandamus, a
relator must establish that an underlying order is void or is a clear abuse of discretion and
there is no adequate appellate remedy. In re Nationwide Ins. Co. of Am., 494 S.W.3d 708,
712 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding); see In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124,
135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839–40 (Tex.
1992) (orig. proceeding). The relator bears the burden of proof. See In re H.E.B. Grocery
Co., 492 S.W.3d 300, 302 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); Walker, 827
S.W.2d at 840.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus,
the limited record provided by relator, the response filed by the real party in interest,
Bonnie Williams, and the applicable law, is of the opinion that relator has not met his
burden of proof to obtain mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of
mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.4, 52.8(a).
L. ARON PEÑA JR. Justice
Delivered and filed on the 14th day of April, 2023.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Alan Eoff v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-alan-eoff-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.