In Re Anurithi Chikkerur v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
• Decided: March 31, 2026
• Docket: 03-26-00129-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-26-00129-CV

In re Anurithi Chikkerur

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, who is acting pro se and a declared vexatious litigant, has filed a petition

for writ of mandamus seeking relief from the Local Administrative Judge’s denial of her request

for permission to file “Motion for Enforcement by Contempt and Request for Clarification if

Necessary.” See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 11.102 (requiring permission from local

administrative judge to file new litigation and allowing mandamus relief when local

administration judge denies request), .103 (prohibiting clerk of court from filing “litigation,

original proceeding, appeal, or other claim presented, pro se, by a vexatious litigant subject to a

prefiling order under Section 11.101 unless the litigant obtains an order from the appropriate

local administrative judge described by Section 11.102(a) permitting the filing”).

It is Relator’s burden to request and properly establish entitlement to

extraordinary relief, including by providing this Court with a sufficient record from which to

evaluate his claims. See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992); In re Smith,

No. 03-14-00478-CV, 2014 WL 4079922, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 13, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (denying mandamus relief when relator failed to provide sufficient

record); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a) (requiring relator to file record containing sworn copies

“of every document that is material to [his] claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying

proceeding”).

Here, Relator has not provided us with a sufficient record from which we may

evaluate the merits of her petition. On this record, we conclude that Relator has failed to show

entitlement to relief. Accordingly, her petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Tex. R.

App. P. 52.8(a).

__________________________________________ Chari L. Kelly, Justice

Before Justices Triana, Kelly, and Ellis

Filed: March 31, 2026