in Re: Great Oaks Holding, L.L.C and Don Kennedy

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedNovember 2, 2004
Docket13-04-00549-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in Re: Great Oaks Holding, L.L.C and Don Kennedy (in Re: Great Oaks Holding, L.L.C and Don Kennedy) 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: Great Oaks Holding, L.L.C and Don Kennedy, (Tex. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion




NUMBER 13-04-549-CV


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________


IN RE GREAT OAKS HOLDING, L.L.C. AND DON KENNEDY

__________________________________________________________________


On Petition for Writ of Mandamus ___________________________________________________________________


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Hinojosa, Garza, and Wittig

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion


         Relators, Great Oaks Holding, L.L.C. and Don Kennedy, filed a motion for emergency temporary relief and petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on October 18, 2004. That same day, the Court granted the motion for emergency temporary relief, stayed the trial court’s October 15, 2004, order requiring the production of documents, and requested a response from the real parties in interest.         The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus and the response, is of the opinion that relators have not shown themselves entitled to the relief sought and the petition for writ of mandamus should be denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8. Accordingly, the stay is hereby ordered LIFTED. The petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. Relators’ request for oral argument is DENIED.

         In reviewing the pleadings and evidence pertaining to this proceeding, we note that the trial court’s oral ruling on request for production number nine, as stated during the hearing on the motion to compel, conflicts with its written ruling in the order granting the motion to compel. We request that the trial court reconsider its ruling on request for production number nine given the parties’ stipulations and arguments below.

                                                                         PER CURIAM



Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

the 2nd of November, 2004.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re: Great Oaks Holding, L.L.C and Don Kennedy, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-great-oaks-holding-llc-and-don-kennedy-texapp-2004.