in Re American Power Conversion Corporation, Relator

Court of Appeals of Texas

in Re American Power Conversion Corporation, Relator

DecidedFebruary 15, 2012

Docket04-12-00083-CV

StatusPublished

This text of in Re American Power Conversion Corporation, Relator (in Re American Power Conversion Corporation, Relator) 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 American Power Conversion Corporation, Relator, (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-12-00083-CV

IN RE AMERICAN POWER CONVERSION CORPORATION

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 15, 2012

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On February 7, 2012, relator American Power Conversion Corporation filed a petition for

writ of mandamus and a motion for temporary relief, complaining of the trial court’s oral ruling

on discovery. Relator indicates the trial court has not provided a final signed order on the

discovery issue. While we acknowledge that in some circumstances it might be appropriate to

review a trial court’s oral ruling through a petition for writ of mandamus, we do not find it

appropriate here. See In re AIG Aviation, Inc., No. 04-04-00291-CV, 2004 WL 1166560, at *1

(Tex. App.—San Antonio May 26, 2004, orig. proceeding) (citing In re Bledsoe, 41 S.W.3d 807,

811 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2001, orig. proceeding) (holding that while it is not encouraged that

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 6660, styled Sara Villarreal, Individually and as Next Friend of Carlota Martinez, A Minor v. Rosalinda Godino Medel, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Karina Medel v. Alvaro J. Medel v. Best Buy Stores, LP, et al., pending in the 49th Judicial District Court, Zapata County, Texas, the Honorable Jose A. Lopez presiding. 04-12-00083-CV

parties file mandamus actions based upon a trial court’s oral ruling, rule 52.3(j)(1)(A) allows

consideration of an oral ruling if the court’s ruling is a clear, specific, and an enforceable order

that is adequately shown by the record)). Due to the extensive amount of discovery relator

complains it is being ordered to produce and the lack of a clear and specific ruling sufficient for

this court’s review of the discovery being ordered, we conclude that at this time mandamus

review is not appropriate. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus and motion for

temporary relief are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

-2-

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