in Re: Rex Performance Products, LLC.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 4, 2018
Docket05-18-01319-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in Re: Rex Performance Products, LLC. (in Re: Rex Performance Products, LLC.) 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.

Bluebook
in Re: Rex Performance Products, LLC., (Tex. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

DENY; and Opinion Filed December 4, 2018.

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-01319-CV

IN RE REX PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, LLC., Relator

Original Proceeding from the 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-17-05538

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang-Miers, Fillmore, and Stoddart Opinion by Justice Fillmore In this original proceeding, relator complains that the trial court denied relator’s renewed

motion to enlarge the discovery period. 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., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding).

“A writ of mandamus will issue only if the trial court reaches a decision so arbitrary and

unreasonable as to amount to a clear and prejudicial error of law and the relator has no adequate

remedy by appeal.” In re Shipman, 540 S.W.3d 562, 565–66 (Tex. 2018) (orig. proceeding)

(quoting In re State Farm Lloyds, 520 S.W.3d 595, 604 (Tex. 2017) (orig. proceeding)). Appellate

courts may not substitute their judgment for the trial court's determination of factual matters

committed to the trial court's discretion. Id. “But with regard to questions of law and mixed

questions of law and fact, a trial court has no discretion in determining what the law is or applying the law to the facts, even when the law is unsettled.” In re State Farm Lloyds, 520 S.W.3d at 604

(internal quotations omitted).

Based on the record before us, we conclude relator has not shown a clear abuse of

discretion. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P.

52.8(a) (the court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief

sought).

/Robert M. Fillmore/ ROBERT M. FILLMORE JUSTICE

181319F.P05

–2–

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Prudential Insurance Co. of America
148 S.W.3d 124 (Texas Supreme Court, 2004)
in Re State Farm Lloyds
520 S.W.3d 595 (Texas Supreme Court, 2017)
In re Shipman
540 S.W.3d 562 (Texas Supreme Court, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re: Rex Performance Products, LLC., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-rex-performance-products-llc-texapp-2018.