In Re: David Edward Saucedo, II and Mariana Terrazas Saucedo, Individually and on Behalf of I. S., a Minor Child v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re: David Edward Saucedo, II and Mariana Terrazas Saucedo, Individually and on Behalf of I. S., a Minor Child v. the State of Texas (In Re: David Edward Saucedo, II and Mariana Terrazas Saucedo, Individually and on Behalf of I. S., a Minor Child 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
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS
§ IN RE: No. 08-22-00089-CV § DAVID EDWARD SAUCEDO II and AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING MARIANA TERRAZAS SAUCEDO, § Individually and on Behalf of I.S., a Minor IN MANDAMUS Child, § Relators. §
JUDGMENT
The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in the
Privilege Order of the trial court to a certain extent; but otherwise, as to all remaining parts, no
error was shown. We conditionally grant mandamus relief in part to the extent we determine the
Privilege Order includes certain overly broad language. As to the penultimate paragraph of the
Privilege Order, we direct the trial court to solely withdraw the phrase stating: “and the information
is not subject to subpoena or discovery and is not admissible as evidence in this civil judicial
proceeding, as stated in § 160.007(e) of the Texas Occupations Code.” Once that phrase is
withdrawn, we further direct the trial court to insert the following in its place: “Plaintiffs are not
prohibited from discovering or potentially admitting into evidence information which is sought
from or has been obtained from alternative sources—but any such information remains subject to
further objection by any party—where the information is not related to a medical peer review committee, or other such body, or otherwise afforded protection under § 160.007(e) of the Texas
Occupations Code.” Lastly, we direct the trial court to sign the Privilege Order, as modified. As to
all other extents, we deny mandamus relief against that order. We deny mandamus relief in its
entirety as to Relator’s complaints against the Amended Redaction Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023.
GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice
Before Rodriguez, 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
In Re: David Edward Saucedo, II and Mariana Terrazas Saucedo, Individually and on Behalf of I. S., a Minor Child v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-david-edward-saucedo-ii-and-mariana-terrazas-saucedo-individually-texapp-2023.