in Re: Aurelia Heppner

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 4, 2022
• Docket: 05-21-00810-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

DENY Opinion Filed May 4, 2022

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00810-CV

IN RE AURELIA HEPPNER, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 330th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-17-21273

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Nowell, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Schenck

Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus challenges the trial court’s

September 13, 2021 order granting real party in interest’s motion for E.B. and J.B.

to be interviewed in the underlying suit affecting parent-child relationship. Relator

contends the trial court abused its discretion in ordering that the eighteen-year-old,

J.B., be interviewed in-chambers under Family Code Section 153.009 arguing that

J.B. is not a child as defined in Family Code Section 101.003 for the purposes of

such interview. See TEX. FAM. CODE §§ 101.003, 153.009. Relator also argues

Page 1 of 2 that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering that the in-chambers interview

be conducted by Family Court Services.

Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court

clearly abused its discretion and that she lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re

Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding).

Based on our review of relator’s petition and record, real party’s response,

and relator’s reply and supplemental record, we conclude relator has failed to

demonstrate a clear abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ

of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

We also lift the stay we ordered on September 23, 2021 as to the interviews.

/David J. Schenck/ DAVID J. SCHENCK JUSTICE

210810F.P05

Page 2 of 2