in Re: Black Horse Carriers, Inc.
This text of in Re: Black Horse Carriers, Inc. (in Re: Black Horse Carriers, Inc.) 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.
Opinion
DENY; and Opinion Filed December 12, 2018.
In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00881-CV
IN RE BLACK HORSE CARRIERS, INC., Relator
Original Proceeding from the 95th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-09587
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Lang-Miers, and Boatright Opinion by Justice Boatright At issue in this petition for writ of mandamus are the general venue provisions that allow
a lawsuit to be filed either in the county of the defendant’s residence at the time the cause of action
accrued if the defendant is a natural person or in the county of the defendant’s principal office in
this state if the defendant is not a natural person. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. §
15.002(a)(2),(3). Andrew Terrell filed the underlying suit against Black Horse and a Black Horse
employee in Dallas County alleging, in relevant part, that Black Horse’s Dallas County office is a
“principal office” under the general venue statute. Id. §§ 15.001(a), 15.002(a)(3). Denying the
venue allegation, Black Horse and its employee moved to transfer the suit to Denton County, the
employee’s county of residence. Id. § 15.002(a)(2). The trial court summarily denied the motion,
and Black Horse now seeks relief from that order. Because the general venue provisions are at issue, mandamus relief is appropriate only if
exceptional circumstances are shown. In re Masonite Corp., 997 S.W.2d 194, 197 (Tex. 1999).
On the record before us, we conclude Black Horse has not shown exceptional circumstances.
Compare In re Team Rocket, 256 S.W.3d 257, 259-60 (Tex. 2008) (trial court violated Texas Rule
of Civil Procedure 87(5) by revisiting venue determination made by another court) and Henderson
v. O’Neill, 797 S.W.2d 905, 905 (Tex. 1990) (per curiam) (trial court violated Texas Rule of Civil
Procedure 87(1) by deviati[ng] from “required procedure” of providing forty-five days’ notice of
hearing on motion to transfer). Accordingly, we deny the petition. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a) (court
must deny petition if it determines relator is not entitled to relief sought).
/Jason Boatright/ JASON BOATRIGHT JUSTICE
180881F.P05
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re: Black Horse Carriers, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-black-horse-carriers-inc-texapp-2018.