In Re Baytown Apartment Group LLC, D/B/A Port Arthur Townhomes, Gurinda Singh Akhtar, Ambers Construction, LLC, Air Akhtar, LLC, and Jeff Akhtar v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 8, 2024
• Docket: 09-24-00253-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-24-00253-CV __________________

IN RE BAYTOWN APARTMENT GROUP LLC, D/B/A PORT ARTHUR TOWNHOMES, GURINDA SINGH AKHTAR, AMBERS CONSTRUCTION, LLC, AIR AKHTAR, LLC, AND JEFF AKHTAR

__________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding 136th District Court of Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. D206,018 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relators Baytown Apartment Group LLC, d/b/a Port Arthur Townhomes,

Gurinda Singh Akhtar, Ambers Construction, LLC, Air Akhtar, LLC, and Jeff

Akhtar filed a petition for a writ of mandamus and a motion to stay all trial court

proceedings while we consider the petition. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221(b);

see also Tex. R. App. P. 52.10(a). Relators argue the trial court abused its discretion

by denying Relators’ no evidence motion for summary judgment and that they lack

an adequate remedy by appeal because the case is still pending.

1 Mandamus relief is an extraordinary remedy that issues only to correct a clear

abuse of discretion for which the relator has no adequate remedy by appeal. See In

re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (orig.

proceeding); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig.

proceeding). “[M]andamus is generally unavailable when a trial court denies

summary judgment, no matter how meritorious the motion.” In re McAllen Med.

Ctr., Inc., 275 S.W.3d 458, 465 (Tex. 2008) (orig. proceeding). One exception

occurs when “the very act of proceeding to trial—regardless of the outcome—would

defeat the substantive right involved.” In re Academy, Ltd., 625 S.W.3d 19, 32 (Tex.

2021) (orig. proceeding).

After considering the mandamus petition and appendix, we conclude that

Relators have failed to establish that the trial court’s order denying their motion for

summary judgment constitutes an abuse of discretion from which there is no

adequate remedy by appeal. We deny the petition for a writ of mandamus and motion

for temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on August 7, 2024 Opinion Delivered August 8, 2024

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.