In Re: Khor Chin Lim v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re: Khor Chin Lim v. the State of Texas (In Re: Khor Chin Lim v. the State of Texas) 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.
Opinion
DENIED and Opinion Filed April 15, 2024
S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00423-CV
IN RE KHOR CHIN LIM, Relator
Original Proceeding from the 298th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-24-04421
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Pedersen, III, Smith, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Smith Before the Court is relator’s April 9, 2024 petition for writ of mandamus
wherein relator asks this Court to compel the trial court to vacate its purported order
denying his ex parte motion for temporary restraining order, vacate its purported
judgment dismissing the case, and grant the temporary restraining order.
Upon review, relator’s petition does not meet the requirements of the Texas
Rules of Appellate Procedure for consideration of mandamus relief. See In re
Backusy, No. 05-23-00674-CV, 2023 WL 4540278, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas July
14, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1, 52.2, 52.3(a)–
(h), 52.3(j)–(k), 52.7(a). For example, it is relator’s burden to provide the Court with a sufficient record
to show entitlement to mandamus relief. In re Skinner, No. 05-23-00930-CV, 2023
WL 6618295, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 11, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.);
see also TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A) (requiring a relator to file “a certified or sworn
copy of any order complained of, or any other document showing the matter
complained of”); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1) (requiring a relator to file “a certified or
sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and
that was filed in any underlying proceeding”). Relator failed to file the order and
judgment complained of or any other document material to his claim for relief.
Relator also failed to certify that the person filing the petition has reviewed
the petition and concluded that every factual statement is supported by competent
evidence included in the appendix or record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j). Without a
certified petition and authenticated record, relator has failed to carry his burden to
provide a sufficient record. See In re Skinner, No. 05-23-01077-CV, 2023 WL
8230683, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Nov. 28, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).
Further, relator’s petition lacks a statement of facts supported by citations to
competent evidence included in an appendix or record, and it does not include a
“clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to
authorities and to the appendix or record.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(g), (h). The
petition is also missing the following: a list identifying the parties and counsel, a
table of contents, an index of authorities, a statement of the case, a statement of
–2– jurisdiction, and a statement of the issues presented. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(a)–(c),
(d)(1)–(3), (e), (f).
Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.
/Craig Smith/ CRAIG SMITH 240423F.P05 JUSTICE
–3–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re: Khor Chin Lim v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-khor-chin-lim-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.