in Re: JOHN HELM

Opinion

NUMBER 13-07-344-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

IN RE JOHN HELM

____________________________________________________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Motion

for Emergency Stay ____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Vela

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion ⁽¹⁾

Relator, John Helm, filed a petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency stay in the above cause on May 31, 2007. Through this original proceeding, relator challenges the trial court's order of May 2, 2007 denying relator's motion for leave to join responsible third parties.

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, which is available only when (1) a trial court clearly abuses its discretion, and (2) there is no adequate remedy by appeal. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus and response thereto is of the opinion that relator has not shown himself entitled to the relief sought. See In re Unitec Elevator Servs. Co., 178 S.W.3d 53, 64-66 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, orig. proceeding); In re Martin, 147 S.W.3d 453, 458-59 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 2004, orig. proceeding); In re Arthur Andersen LLP, 121 S.W.3d 471, 485-86 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, the motion for emergency stay and petition for writ of mandamus are DENIED. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

Justice Vela, dissenting, without separate opinion.

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this 1st day of June, 2007.

1. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(d) ("When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so."); Tex. R. App. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).