In Re Alicia Gonzalez and Nicole Trebilcock v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 25, 2024
Docket13-23-00546-CV
StatusPublished

This text of In Re Alicia Gonzalez and Nicole Trebilcock v. the State of Texas (In Re Alicia Gonzalez and Nicole Trebilcock 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.

Bluebook
In Re Alicia Gonzalez and Nicole Trebilcock v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-23-00546-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

IN RE ALICIA GONZALEZ AND NICOLE TREBILCOCK

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Longoria, Silva, and Peña Memorandum Opinion by Justice Silva1

Relators Alicia Gonzalez and Nicole Trebilcock filed a petition for writ of mandamus

through which they contend that the trial court abused its discretion by granting motions

to dismiss filed by the real parties in interest, John Blaha and the Coastal Conservation

Association (CCA). See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. §§ 27.001–011 (codifying the

Texas Citizens Participation Act).

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). 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). The relator must show that (1) the trial

court abused its discretion, and (2) the relator lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. In re

USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 624 S.W.3d 782, 787 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding); In re

Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d at 135–36; Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833,

839–40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus,

the responses filed by Blaha and the CCA, the replies thereto filed by relators, and the

applicable law, is of the opinion that relators have not met their burden to obtain relief.

Accordingly, we lift the stay previously imposed in this cause. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10.

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

CLARISSA SILVA Justice

Delivered and filed on the 25th day of January, 2024.

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

Related

In Re Prudential Insurance Co. of America
148 S.W.3d 124 (Texas Supreme Court, 2004)
Walker v. Packer
827 S.W.2d 833 (Texas Supreme Court, 1992)
In re Garza
544 S.W.3d 836 (Texas Supreme Court, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re Alicia Gonzalez and Nicole Trebilcock v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-alicia-gonzalez-and-nicole-trebilcock-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.