in Re Brenda L. Caddell

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 4, 2021
• Docket: 05-21-00233-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Denied and Opinion Filed August 4, 2021

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00233-CV

IN RE BRENDA L. CADDELL, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 303rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-19-13738

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Osborne, Pedersen, III, and Goldstein Opinion by Justice Pedersen, III Relator’s April 12, 2021 petition for writ of mandamus challenges the visiting

judge’s order overruling her objection to the visiting judge. The record is not

properly authenticated as required by the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k) (requiring certified or sworn documents in the appendix);

52.7(a)(1) (requiring certified or sworn copy of record); see also In re Butler, 270

S.W.3d 757, 758–59 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, orig. proceeding) (denying petition

for failing to comply with Rule 52’s authentication requirements). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus without prejudice to refiling a record that

satisfies the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.1

210233f.p05 /Bill Pedersen, III// BILL PEDERSEN, III JUSTICE

1 We have no authority to issue a writ of mandamus to a successor judge for a visiting judge’s ruling. See TEX. R. APP. P. 7.2(b) (“If the case is an original proceeding under Rule 52, the court must abate the proceeding to allow the successor to reconsider the original party’s decision.”). Rule 7.2(b) would require us to give the successor judge an opportunity to reconsider the challenged order before we may consider relator’s request for mandamus relief. Nevertheless, we note that our opinion does not prevent Relator from refiling another enforcement action. –2–