in Re Jerrod Hoyle

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 9, 2022
• Docket: 14-22-00581-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed August 9, 2022.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-22-00581-CV

IN RE JERROD HOYLE, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS County Court at Law Washington County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2022-101

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On August 5, 2022, relator Jerrod Hoyle filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the Honorable Eric Berg, presiding judge of the County Court at Law of Washington County, to rule on his motion to set bond and motion to quash writ of possession. Ruling on a properly filed motion pending in the trial court is a ministerial act, and mandamus may issue to compel the trial court to act. Safety-Kleen Corp. v. Garcia, 945 S.W.2d 268, 269 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, orig. proceeding). To establish that the trial court abused its discretion, the relator must show that the trial court (1) had a legal duty to perform a nondiscretionary act; (2) was asked to perform the act; and (3) failed or refused to do so. In re Texas Parks & Wildlife Dep’t, 483 S.W.3d 795, 797 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2016, orig. proceeding); In re Greater McAllen Star Props., Inc., 444 S.W.3d 743, 748 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2014, orig. proceeding); In re Shredder Co., L.L.C., 225 S.W.3d 676, 679 (Tex.—El Paso 2006, orig. proceeding). Relator has not asked the trial court to rule on his motions.

Relator has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. We also deny relator’s motion to stay.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Wise and Hassan.