in Re: Keith Russell Judd

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 24, 2012
Docket06-12-00011-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in Re: Keith Russell Judd (in Re: Keith Russell Judd) 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: Keith Russell Judd, (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana ______________________________

No. 06-12-00011-CV ______________________________

IN RE: KEITH RUSSELL JUDD

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter MEMORANDUM OPINION

Keith Russell Judd has petitioned this Court for mandamus relief. Judd would have us

compel the trial court to issue a default judgment on Judd’s petition for divorce. We deny Judd’s

requested relief.

Mandamus issues only when the mandamus record establishes (1) a clear abuse of

discretion or the violation of a duty imposed by law, and (2) the absence of a clear and adequate

remedy at law. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839–40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding); see

In re Columbia Med. Ctr. of Las Colinas Subsidiary, L.P., 290 S.W.3d 204, 207 (Tex. 2009) (orig.

proceeding). It is the relator’s burden to provide this Court with a sufficient record to establish

the right to mandamus relief. Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837; In re Pilgrim’s Pride Corp., 187

S.W.3d 197, 198–99 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2006, orig. proceeding); see TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3.

Judd has provided this Court with no documents supporting his request. While he has

attached a noncertified copy of the officer’s return indicating service of process was delivered to

the respondent, he has neither provided a certified copy of the motion for default judgment Judd

claims to have filed in the trial court, nor of any other filings in the trial court.1

1 This Court denied a similar request for mandamus relief requested by Judd last year. In re Judd, 06-11-00035-CV, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 2501 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Apr. 5, 2011, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).

2 We find Judd has failed to demonstrate he is entitled to the extraordinary remedy of

mandamus relief. We, therefore, deny his petition.

Jack Carter Justice

Date Submitted: January 23, 2012 Date Decided: January 24, 2012

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

Related

In Re Columbia Medical Center of Las Colinas, Subsidiary, L.P.
290 S.W.3d 204 (Texas Supreme Court, 2009)
In Re Pilgrim's Pride Corp.
187 S.W.3d 197 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Walker v. Packer
827 S.W.2d 833 (Texas Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re: Keith Russell Judd, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-keith-russell-judd-texapp-2012.