In Re Quintilya Thomas v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Quintilya Thomas v. the State of Texas (In Re Quintilya Thomas v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS ————————————
No. 08-26-00120-CV ————————————
In re Quintilya Thomas
AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS
M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N Pending before the Court is Relator’s emergency motion for temporary relief and stay
pending mandamus, in which she requests that this Court immediately stay enforcement of default
temporary orders allegedly entered by the 388th District Court. Because the motion is not
accompanied by a petition, we dismiss the motion for want of jurisdiction.
To commence an original appellate proceeding seeking extraordinary relief, a relator must
file a petition with the clerk of the appellate court. Tex. R. App. P. 52.1. Once the original
proceeding has commenced, a party may seek temporary relief pending the court’s action on the petition. Tex. R. App. P. 52.10(a), (b). Although Rule 52.10(b) authorizes this Court to grant
temporary relief, it implicitly requires a petition to invoke our jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P.
52.10(b); see also In re Hicks, 524 S.W.3d 307 (Tex. App.—Waco 2016, orig. proceeding) (finding
an emergency motion filed without a petition to be “premature” and dismissing the motion); In re
Kelleher, 999 S.W.2d 51, 52 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, orig. proceeding) (“Implicit within this
rule is the need for a petition to be filed before the court can grant emergency relief.”); In re
Nonamé, No. 03-25-00937-CV, 2025 WL 3491569, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Dec. 5, 2025, orig.
proceeding) (mem. op.) (dismissing for want of jurisdiction a motion for temporary relief without
a petition).
Because Relator has not commenced an original proceeding, we lack jurisdiction over her
motion seeking emergency relief. We dismiss the motion for want of jurisdiction without prejudice
to refiling after a petition for writ of mandamus has been filed.
MARIA SALAS MENDOZA, Chief Justice
March 20, 2026
Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox and Soto, 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 Quintilya Thomas v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-quintilya-thomas-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp8-2026.