In Re Raul Ortiz v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Raul Ortiz v. the State of Texas (In Re Raul Ortiz 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
NUMBER 13-25-00547-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
IN RE RAUL ORTIZ
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices Cron and Fonseca Memorandum Opinion by Justice Cron1
Relator Raul Ortiz filed a petition for writ of mandamus asserting that the trial court
erred by issuing a temporary restraining order on October 16, 2025, in violation of Rules
680 and 683 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 680, 683.
Mandamus is an extraordinary and discretionary remedy. See In re Allstate Indem.
Co., 622 S.W.3d 870, 883 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding); In re Garza, 544 S.W.3d 836,
1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not
required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). 840 (Tex. 2018) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148
S.W.3d 124, 138 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Ordinarily, the relator must show that:
(1) the trial court abused its discretion; and (2) the relator lacks an adequate remedy on
appeal. In re USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 624 S.W.3d 782, 787 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding);
In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d at 135–36; Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d
833, 839–40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Temporary restraining orders are not subject
to appeal, and they may be reviewed by mandamus. See In re Abbott, 601 S.W.3d 802,
813 (Tex. 2020) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); In re Off. of Att’y Gen., 257 S.W.3d 695,
698 (Tex. 2008) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); In re County of Hidalgo, 655 S.W.3d 44,
55 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2022, orig. proceeding).
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus,
the response filed by the real party in interest Noreen Monette Perez, and the applicable
law, is of the opinion that this original proceeding has been rendered moot. See In re L.A.-
K., 596 S.W.3d 387, 396 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2020, no pet.); In re Sierra Club, 420
S.W.3d 153, 156 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2012, orig. proceeding). Specifically, the temporary
restraining order at issue has expired. Accordingly, we dismiss this original proceeding
as moot.
JENNY CRON Justice
Delivered and filed on the 10th day of November, 2025.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Raul Ortiz v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-raul-ortiz-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.