in Re Donald L. Bloom

Opinion

Opinion issued August 30, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

to another trial court.1 To obtain mandamus relief, Bloom must show that the trial court abused its discretion and he does not have an adequate remedy by appeal. See In re Nat’l Lloyds Ins. Co., 507 W.W.3d 219, 226 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding). Because his mandamus proceeding reflects that the trial court has signed a final judgment dismissing his case, Bloom has an adequate remedy by appeal of the dismissal order. See In re Quimby, No. 14-18-00550-CV, 2018 WL 3543610, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] July 24, 2018, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(a), 26.1, 26.3.

We deny the petition.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Massengale.

1 The underlying case is Donald L. Bloom v. Donald Ray Stafford (MD), No. 2017-

50445, in the 189th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable William R. Burke presiding.

Footnotes

1. NO. 01-18-00563-CV ——————————— IN RE DONALD L. BLOOM, Relator Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, Donald L. Bloom, has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, challenging the trial court’s actions in the underlying proceeding, including the dismissal of Bloom’s case against the real party in interest, Donald Ray Stafford, M.D. Bloom asks that his case “be restored” and be transferred from one trial court