In Re: City of Garland, Texas v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re: City of Garland, Texas v. the State of Texas (In Re: City of Garland, Texas v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
DISMISSED and Opinion Filed January 23, 2024
S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00019-CV
IN RE CITY OF GARLAND, TEXAS, Relator
Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-02090-A
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Reichek, Goldstein, and Kennedy Opinion by Justice Goldstein Before the Court is relator’s January 5, 2024 petition for writ of mandamus.
Relator asks this Court to compel respondent to rule on its plea to the jurisdiction.
On January 17, 2024, this Court granted relator’s agreed emergency motion
for stay and stayed all trial court proceedings, including a February 12, 2024 trial,
pending determination of this original proceeding. The Court also requested a
response, if any, to relator’s mandamus petition on or before January 31, 2024.
On January 22, 2024, relator filed a motion for relief from stay. Relator states
that on January 18, 2024, the trial court entered an order denying relator’s plea to
the jurisdiction and that the order reflects it was signed on January 17, 2024. Relator asks this Court to lift the stay issued by this Court’s January 17, 2024 Order “for the
limited purpose of allowing [relator] to file its anticipated notice of appeal.”
Relator did not attach a copy of the trial court’s order to its motion. But we
take judicial notice of the trial court’s online docket sheet for the suit underlying this
original proceeding. In re Johnson, 599 S.W.3d 311, 311 n. 1 (Tex. App.—Dallas
2020, orig. proceeding). The trial court’s online docket sheet shows that the trial
court denied relator’s plea to the jurisdiction on January 17, 2024.
A case becomes moot if the issues presented are no longer live or the parties
lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome. Id. A court lacks subject-matter
jurisdiction over a case that has become moot. Id. at 311–12.
The trial court’s ruling on relator’s plea to the jurisdiction delivers all of the
relief relator is requesting in this original proceeding. Thus, this original proceeding
is moot. See Id. at 312 (dismissing mandamus petition as moot when trial court ruled
on pending motion and relator received relief requested in mandamus petition).
Accordingly, we dismiss as moot relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. We
also lift the stay issued by this Court’s January 17, 2024 Order and deny as moot
relator’s January 22, 2024 motion for relief from stay.
/Bonnie Lee Goldstein/ BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN JUSTICE 240019F.P05
–2–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re: City of Garland, Texas v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-city-of-garland-texas-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.