in Re Esther Akindayomi

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 10, 2019
Docket13-19-00625-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in Re Esther Akindayomi (in Re Esther Akindayomi) 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.

Bluebook
in Re Esther Akindayomi, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-19-00625-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN RE ESTHER AKINDAYOMI, ET AL.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

ORDER

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Hinojosa and Tijerina Order Per Curiam

Relators Esther Akindayomi et al. 1 filed a petition for writ of mandamus and

emergency motion to enforce automatic stay in the above cause on December 6, 2019.

1 Relators include Esther Akindayomi, Deyanira Arango, GuadalupeArmstrong, Michael B. Bass, Maria De Mora Betancourt, Sanjuanita Cadena, Maura Cardenas, Elisa Castro, Diana Cavazos, Raquel Cerda, Silvia Conlan, Silvia Cook, Irma Cruz, Manuel Enriquez, Alejandra Vasquez Espinoza, Irma Flores, Joanne Flores, Maria Del Carmen Gonzalez, Maria Guajardo, Alex Guillen, Cesar Guzman, Maria Guadalupe Guzman, Esthela Hernandez, Lyzbeth Leon, Lyzbeth Leon, Mario Martinez, Mario Martinez, Andrameda Mendoza, Ana Moniet, Raul Montalvo Jr., Raul Montalvo Jr., Graciela Perez, Graciela Perez, Ramon Perez, Alejandra Reyes, Claudio Rodriguez, Gloria Rodriguez, Maria Rodriguez, Valdemar Rodriguez, Ramona Ruiz, Jose Luis Ruvalcaba, Lorena Ruvalcaba, Micheal Saldana, Mario Salinas, Lorenzo Silvestre-Zavala, Sosa, Irene Suarez, Sylvina Villarreal, Hector Yado, and Jose Zubieta. Relators contend that the trial court abused its discretion by conducting proceedings in

violation of the automatic stay provided by Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code §

51.014(b). See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(b). Relators ask that we stay

all proceedings pending in the 464th District Court that were “improperly transferred to

the originating trial court” by the MDL pretrial court in cause number MDL-15-0360-G

pending resolution of this original proceeding or related appeals.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the request for emergency relief,

is of the opinion that the motion should be granted as stated here. We GRANT relators’

request for emergency relief and order the trial court proceedings as described above to

be STAYED pending further order of this Court, or until the case is finally decided. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10(b) (“Unless vacated or modified, an order granting temporary relief

is effective until the case is finally decided.”).

The Court requests that the real parties in interest, Rio Grande Regional Hospital,

Inc., HCA Health Services of Texas, Inc., and Resource Corporation of America &

Recovery of Texas, LLC, or any others whose interest would be directly affected by the

relief sought, file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus on or before the

expiration of ten days from the date of this order. See id. R. 52.2, 52.4, 52.8.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 10th day of December, 2019.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

§ 51.014
Texas CP § 51.014(b)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re Esther Akindayomi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-esther-akindayomi-texapp-2019.