In Re Chelette Baker, Samantha Garcia, and Karmen Schuster v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 23, 2023
• Docket: 13-23-00064-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-23-00064-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

IN RE CHELETTE BAKER, SAMANTHA GARCIA, AND KARMEN SCHUSTER

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Tijerina, and Peña Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides1

On February 15, 2023, relators Chelette Baker, Samantha Garcia, and Karmen

Schuster filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the trial court to either

1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not

required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R. 47.1 (“The court of appeals must hand down a written opinion that is as brief as practicable but that addresses every issue raised and necessary to final disposition of the appeal.”); id. R. 47.4 (explaining the differences between opinions and memorandum opinions). transfer the underlying case to the 23rd District Court of Matagorda County, Texas, or

alternatively, “to require the trial court to accomplish the assignment of this case to a

statutory probate court judge.” We requested the real parties in interest, Annie Findley

Jones, independent administrator of the estate of Harold Jack Findley; Luther Hotel, Inc.;

and “unknown heirs”2 represented by Philip J. Hundl; or any others whose interest may

be directly affected by the relief sought, to file a response to the petition for writ of

mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.4, 52.8. On February 17, 2023, relators filed an

emergency motion for a ruling on their petition for writ of mandamus. However, on

February 21, 2023, relators filed a motion to dismiss their petition for writ of mandamus

and motion for emergency relief. According to relators’ motion to dismiss, a statutory

probate court judge has been appointed in this case, and thus relators’ petition for writ of

mandamus and emergency motion have been rendered moot.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the motion to dismiss, is of the

opinion that it should be granted. See In re Contract Freighters, Inc., 646 S.W.3d 810,

813 (Tex. 2022) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); Heckman v. Williamson County, 369

S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012); In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737

(Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we grant the motion to dismiss. We dismiss

this petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency relief as moot. See TEX. R.

2 We note that the “unknown heirs” appear to be identified in the mandamus record as: Kenneth Findley, Shelby Jean Hayes, Anthony Stephen Findley, Danielle Craven, Tyler Wade, Landon Wade, Richard Donald Findley, Linda Gail Flowers, Craig Steven Yancy, Jonathan Chad Yancy, Tristian Ray Samuel Yancy, Lauren Kay Elizabeth Yancy, Susan Rene Witkowski, Carolyn Treece, Denise Munza, Thomas Heath Back, Donna Dennis, Joseph Dan Findley, Darla Gayle Phillips, Ronald Darren Findley, Debbie Lynn Busby, Timothy John Clifton, Patrick Newley, Zachary Newley, Benji Dale Clifton, Annie Ruth Findley Jones, Gary David Findley, Angela McElroy, Billy McPherson, Jr., Bart McPherson, Bret McPherson, Felicia Dianne Findley, and Lucretia Suzanne Phillips.

2 APP. P. 52.8, 52.10(b).

GINA M. BENAVIDES Justice

Delivered and filed on the 23rd day of February, 2023.