In Re Christus Santa Rosa Health Care Corporation D/B/A Christus Santa Rosa Hospital - New Braunfels v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)
• Decided: February 18, 2026
• Docket: 04-26-00106-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-26-00106-CV

IN RE CHRISTUS SANTA ROSA HEALTH CARE CORPORATION D/B/A CHRISTUS SANTA ROSA HOSPITAL - NEW BRAUNFELS

Original Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice H. Todd McCray, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 18, 2026

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TEMPORARY STAY DENIED AS MOOT

On February 9, 2026, relator filed its petition for writ of mandamus and emergency motion

for temporary stay challenging an alleged verbal order issued by the trial court on February 6,

2026. According to relator, the trial court’s oral order required it to produce certain discovery that

it claims are proprietary and confidential by the end of business on February 9, 2026. Relator does

not include a copy of a written order, a transcript of the hearing, or the judge’s notes from the

hearing to evidence the order complained of as required by the Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(B); Id. at 52.7(a).

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2025-CI-03945, styled Pierson v. Christus Health Care Corporation, pending in the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Nadine Melissa Nieto presiding. 04-26-00106-CV

The requirements of mandamus dictate that the relator provide a sufficient record showing

that they are entitled to mandamus relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992)

(orig. proceeding); In re Marty, Inc., No. 04-20-00067-CV, 2020 WL 557076, at *1 (Tex. App.—

San Antonio Feb. 5, 2020, orig. proceeding). We may deny a petition for a writ of mandamus for

an inadequate record alone. See In re Blakeney, 254 S.W.3d 659, 662 (Tex. App.—Texarkana

2008, orig. proceeding).

Having considered the petition for writ of mandamus, emergency motion for temporary

stay, and the record provided, this court concludes that relator has not established that it is entitled

to the relief sought. The petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). The

emergency motion for temporary stay is denied as moot.

-2-