in Re M.N.
This text of in Re M.N. (in Re M.N.) 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
In The
Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-15-00236-CV _________________
IN RE M.N.
________________________________________________________________________
Original Proceeding ________________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator filed a motion for a temporary stay of the trial and a petition for writ
of mandamus requesting that the Court order the Judge of the County Court at Law
Number 3 of Montgomery County to dismiss a termination case. According to
Relator, the original dismissal date was November 24, 2014. On October 20, 2014,
the trial court extended the dismissal date to May 23, 2015. According to Relator,
the trial on the merits commenced May 18, 2015, a motion for mistrial was
granted, and the trial re-commenced on May 22, 2015. Relator filed a motion to
dismiss on May 26, 2015, after the trial commenced.
1 The mandamus record establishes that the trial on the merits commenced
before the extended dismissal date. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 263.401 (West
2014). Relator did not file a motion to dismiss before the trial on the merits
commenced. The motion to dismiss was filed on May 26, 2015, after the trial
commenced. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 263.402 (West 2014). Therefore, Realtor has
not established an abuse of discretion by the trial court. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann.
§§ 263.401-.402. Furthermore, Relator has not shown that an accelerated appeal
would not provide an adequate remedy. See In re Tex. Dep’t of Family &
Protective Servs., 210 S.W.3d 609, 614 (Tex. 2006) (concluding that an
accelerated appeal provided an adequate remedy for trial court’s failure to dismiss
a suit under section 263.401 of the Texas Family Code). We deny the petition for a
writ of mandamus and the motion for temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8.
PETITION DENIED.
PER CURIAM
Opinion Delivered June 12, 2015
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re M.N., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-mn-texapp-2015.