In Re Cesar Espinosa and FIEL Houston, Inc. v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Cesar Espinosa and FIEL Houston, Inc. v. the State of Texas (In Re Cesar Espinosa and FIEL Houston, Inc. v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion issued January 14, 2026
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-25-00789-CV ——————————— IN RE CESAR ESPINOSA AND FIEL HOUSTON, INC., Relators
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relators, Cesar Espinosa and FIEL Houston, Inc., filed a petition for writ of
mandamus challenging the trial court’s September 15, 2025 order granting the
petition to take pre-suit depositions pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 202,
filed by real party in interest, Meneses Law, PLLC.1 In their petition for writ of
1 The underlying case is Meneses Law, PLLC v. Cesar Espinosa and FIEL Houston, Inc., Cause No. 2025-56358, in the 61st District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Lee Kathryn Shuchart presiding mandamus, relators argued that the trial court abused its discretion by granting the
request for pre-suit depositions despite the failure of real party in interest to present
“competent evidence” in support of its request for pre-suit depositions. Relators
therefore requested that the Court grant the petition and “[d]irect the trial court to
vacate its September 15, 2025 order and deny Meneses Law’s Rule 202 Petition.”
In connection with their petition for writ of mandamus, relators filed an
“Emergency Motion to Stay the Underlying Proceedings,” and requested that the
Court stay all proceedings in the underlying trial court cause, specifically the
depositions ordered in the trial court’s September 15, 2025 order challenged here.
The Court granted the motion and stayed any obligation to appear for a deposition
in the underlying cause pending this Court’s review of the petition for writ of
mandamus. The Court further requested a response to the petition for writ of
mandamus, and real party in interest filed a response in opposition to the request for
mandamus relief.
We conclude that relators have failed to establish they are entitled to
mandamus relief, and the Court therefore lifts the stay imposed by our September
26, 2025 order and denies relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. We dismiss any
pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Gunn and Johnson.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Cesar Espinosa and FIEL Houston, Inc. v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-cesar-espinosa-and-fiel-houston-inc-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp1-2026.