In Re Mayra Isabel Bustamante v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Mayra Isabel Bustamante v. the State of Texas (In Re Mayra Isabel Bustamante 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
Opinion issued November 13, 2025
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-25-00898-CV ——————————— IN RE MAYRA ISABEL BUSTAMANTE, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Mayra Isabel Bustamante, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus
challenging an order granting a bill of review.1 We deny the petition. See Patrick
O’Connor & Assocs., L.P. v. Wang Inv. Networks, Inc., No. 01-12-00615-CV, 2013
WL 1451358, at *1–2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 9, 2013, orig.
1 The underlying case is In the Matter of the Marriage of Erik Bustamante and Mayra Isabel Bustamante, cause number 24-DCV-321554, pending in the 505th District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas, the Honorable Kali Morgan presiding. proceeding) (mem. op.) (“[T]he general rule stated by both this Court and our sister
court in Houston is that an interlocutory order granting a bill of review may not be
reviewed by mandamus, but by appeal of the eventual final judgment in the case.”)
(citing In re Moreno, 4 S.W.3d 278, 281 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1999,
orig. proceeding); Stettner v. Apollo Paint & Body Shop, Inc., Nos. 01–02–00667–
CV & 01–02–00204–CV, 2002 WL 1586282, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.]
July 18, 2002, orig. proceeding, no pet.) (combined mandamus and appeal)); see also
In re Bowe, No. 14-19-00636-CV, 2019 WL 4621062, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston
[14th Dist.] Sept. 24, 2019, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).2
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Guiney, and Johnson.
2 The one exception to the general rule that the granting of a bill of review is not subject to mandamus is inapplicable because this case is not a paternity suit in which genetic testing has been ordered. See Patrick O’Connor & Assocs., 2013 WL 1451358, at *2. . 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Mayra Isabel Bustamante v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-mayra-isabel-bustamante-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.