in Re David Earl Stanley

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-14-00378-CV

____________________

IN RE DAVID EARL STANLEY

_______________________________________________________ ______________

Original Proceeding

________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

David Earl Stanley filed an original petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the Judge of the 258th District Court to rule on motions that Stanley filed in a forfeiture proceeding. Stanley states that he filed the motions pro se while represented by counsel. “[A] trial court is under no mandatory duty to accept or consider pleadings filed pro se by a party who is represented by counsel.” In re Sondley, 990 S.W.2d 361, 362 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, orig. proceeding); see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 7. We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

PETITION DENIED.

2

PER CURIAM

Submitted on September 24, 2014 Opinion Delivered September 25, 2014

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.