In Re Gibraltar Finance & Mortgage, Inc. v. the State of Texas

Court of Appeals of Texas

In Re Gibraltar Finance & Mortgage, Inc. v. the State of Texas

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided December 9, 2025·No. 01-25-00976-CV·Published

Opinion

Opinion issued December 9, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

was able to fully present its case.”2 Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus requested that the Court grant its petition and issue a writ of mandamus ordering the trial court to “vacate [its] order and retry the bill of review case fully.”

We conclude that relator has failed to establish it is entitled to mandamus relief, and, therefore, the Court denies relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See Patrick O’Connor & Assocs., L.P. v. Wang Inv. Networks, Inc., No. 01-12-00615-CV, 2013 WL 1451358, at *1–2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 9, 2013, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (“[T]he general rule stated by both this Court and our sister court in Houston is that an interlocutory order granting a bill of review may not be reviewed by mandamus, but by appeal of the eventual final judgment in the case.”); In re Moreno, 4 S.W.3d 278, 281 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding) (denying petition for writ of mandamus from trial court order granting bill of review “[b]ecause relators ha[d] an adequate remedy by appeal of the eventual final judgment in the underlying case”); see also In re Mayra Isabel Bustamante, No. 01-25-00898-CV, 2025 WL 3165473, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston

2 Relator also filed a notice of appeal in this Court from the trial court’s July 16, 2025 “Order Granting Bill of Review.” However, after real party in interest moved to dismiss that appeal because the trial court’s order was not a final judgment or otherwise appealable order, on October 21, 2025, relator filed a motion to dismiss that appeal. The Court granted the motion and dismissed the appeal on October 30, 2025. See Gibraltar Fin. & Mortg., Inc. v. DB Webster, Ltd., No. 01-25-00642-CV, 2025 WL 3028893, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 30, 2025, no pet.)

(mem. op.).

[1st Dist.] Nov. 13, 2025, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Caughey, and Dokupil.

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

Opinion issued December 9, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

was able to fully present its case.”2 Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus requested that the Court grant its petition and issue a writ of mandamus ordering the trial court to “vacate [its] order and retry the bill of review case fully.”

We conclude that relator has failed to establish it is entitled to mandamus relief, and, therefore, the Court denies relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See Patrick O’Connor & Assocs., L.P. v. Wang Inv. Networks, Inc., No. 01-12-00615-CV, 2013 WL 1451358, at *1–2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 9, 2013, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (“[T]he general rule stated by both this Court and our sister court in Houston is that an interlocutory order granting a bill of review may not be reviewed by mandamus, but by appeal of the eventual final judgment in the case.”); In re Moreno, 4 S.W.3d 278, 281 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding) (denying petition for writ of mandamus from trial court order granting bill of review “[b]ecause relators ha[d] an adequate remedy by appeal of the eventual final judgment in the underlying case”); see also In re Mayra Isabel Bustamante, No. 01-25-00898-CV, 2025 WL 3165473, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston

2 Relator also filed a notice of appeal in this Court from the trial court’s July 16, 2025 “Order Granting Bill of Review.” However, after real party in interest moved to dismiss that appeal because the trial court’s order was not a final judgment or otherwise appealable order, on October 21, 2025, relator filed a motion to dismiss that appeal. The Court granted the motion and dismissed the appeal on October 30, 2025. See Gibraltar Fin. & Mortg., Inc. v. DB Webster, Ltd., No. 01-25-00642-CV, 2025 WL 3028893, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 30, 2025, no pet.)

(mem. op.).

[1st Dist.] Nov. 13, 2025, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Caughey, and Dokupil.

In Re Gibraltar Finance & Mortgage, Inc. v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2025).

Pincite

In Re Gibraltar Finance & Mortgage, Inc. v. the State of Texas (In Re Gibraltar Finance & Mortgage, Inc. v. the State of Texas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related