in Re Michael Kennedy

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_________________

NO. 09-17-00424-CV

_________________

IN RE MICHAEL KENNEDY

________________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding

411th District Court of Polk County, Texas Trial Cause No. CIV31334

________________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Michael Kennedy filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the trial court to rule on Kennedy’s motions for an injunction. Kennedy supplemented his mandamus petition with copies of documents that indicate that a final order or judgment has been signed.

To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Generally, there is no benefit to mandamus relief after an appealable

2

judgment has been signed. See In re Energy Transfer Fuel, L.P., 298 S.W.3d 348, 351 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2009, orig. proceeding).

After reviewing Kennedy’s mandamus petition and appendices, we conclude that he has not shown that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.

PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on January 10, 2018 Opinion Delivered January 11, 2018

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.