In Re Ali Choudhri v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Ali Choudhri v. the State of Texas (In Re Ali Choudhri 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
Opinion issued April 8, 2025
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-25-00162-CV ——————————— IN RE ALI CHOUDHRI, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, Ali Choudhri, filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging
challenging the trial court’s January 8, 2025 “Order Granting Emergency Motion for
Sanctions for Violation of Court Order and for Appointment of Limited Purpose
Receiver.”1 The order challenged by relator was signed by the Honorable Robert
1 The underlying case is George M. Lee v. Ali Choudhri, Cause No. 2020-16175, in the 152nd District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable TaKasha Francis presiding. Schaffer. Judge Schaffer ceased to hold the office of judge of the 152nd District
Court of Harris County, Texas on December 31, 2024. Judge Schaffer was
succeeded by the Honorable TaKasha Francis, whose term as the judge of the 152nd
District Court of Harris County, Texas began on January 1, 2025.
In his petition for writ of mandamus, relator argued that the January 8, 2025
order, signed by Judge Schaffer, was void because Judge Schaffer signed the order
after the expiration of his term as judge of the 152nd District Court, and he therefore
“had no authority, no power, [and] no jurisdiction” to sign the order. Relator
therefore requested that this Court grant his petition for writ of mandamus, declare
that the January 8, 2025 order signed by Judge Schaffer is void, and direct the trial
court to vacate the January 8, 2025 order.
The Court requested that real party in interest, George M. Lee, file a response
to the petition for writ of mandamus. On March 28, 2025, Lee filed a response to
the mandamus petition, along with an appendix in support of his response.
Based on our review of the mandamus record, we conclude that relator has
failed to establish he is entitled to mandamus relief, and therefore the Court denies
relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Gunn and Guiney.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Ali Choudhri v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ali-choudhri-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.