In Re Charlie Clark, Individually, Amaru Motors, L.P., Amaru Motors 2, LLC, Amaru Motors 3, LLC, Amaru Motors 5, LLC, and Amaru Motors 6, LLC v. the State of Texas

CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)
DecidedFebruary 12, 2026
Docket08-25-00201-CV
StatusPublished

This text of In Re Charlie Clark, Individually, Amaru Motors, L.P., Amaru Motors 2, LLC, Amaru Motors 3, LLC, Amaru Motors 5, LLC, and Amaru Motors 6, LLC v. the State of Texas (In Re Charlie Clark, Individually, Amaru Motors, L.P., Amaru Motors 2, LLC, Amaru Motors 3, LLC, Amaru Motors 5, LLC, and Amaru Motors 6, LLC v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Charlie Clark, Individually, Amaru Motors, L.P., Amaru Motors 2, LLC, Amaru Motors 3, LLC, Amaru Motors 5, LLC, and Amaru Motors 6, LLC v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS ————————————

No. 08-25-00201-CV

————————————

In Re Charlie Clark, Individually, Amaru Motors, L.P., Amaru Motors 2, LLC, Amaru Motors 3, LLC, Amaru Motors 5, LLC, and Amaru Motors 6, LLC

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS

M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N

On August 1, 2025, Relators filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging the trial

court’s July 2, 2025 order denying their Rule 91a motion to dismiss claims brought through

piercing the corporate veil allegations. 1

1 The underlying case is trial court Cause No. 2024DCV2255, in the 205th District Court of El Paso County, Texas, the Honorable Francisco X. Dominguez presiding. Relators have filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus. In

the motion, Relator states that on February 6, 2026, the trial court entered a final judgment in the

underlying case. Relator’s motion includes a certificate of conference representing that real parties

in interest are not opposed to the relief sought in the motion to dismiss. See Tex. R. App. P.

10.3(a)(2).

Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the petition.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

February 12, 2026

Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re Charlie Clark, Individually, Amaru Motors, L.P., Amaru Motors 2, LLC, Amaru Motors 3, LLC, Amaru Motors 5, LLC, and Amaru Motors 6, LLC v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-charlie-clark-individually-amaru-motors-lp-amaru-motors-2-llc-txctapp8-2026.