in Re Robert S. Howell, D.C. and First Rio Valley Medical, P.A.

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided August 14, 2002·No. 03-02-00490-CV·Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN




NO.03-02-00490-CV

In re Robert S. Howell, D.C. and First Rio Valley Medical, P.A.



ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

We deny relators' petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a); see also Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a)(4) (West Supp. 2002) (party may appeal interlocutory temporary injunction order); Tex. R. App. P. 28.1 (appeals from interlocutory orders will be accelerated); Reynolds, Shannon, Miller, Blinn, White & Cook v. Flanary, 872 S.W.2d 248, 251 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1993, no writ) (holding that party challenging temporary injunction has adequate remedy by accelerated, interlocutory appeal).



Marilyn Aboussie, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices B. A. Smith and Yeakel

Filed: August 14, 2002

Do Not Publish

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

in Re Robert S. Howell, D.C. and First Rio Valley Medical, P.A., (Tex. Ct. App. 2002).

in Re Robert S. Howell, D.C. and First Rio Valley Medical, P.A. (in Re Robert S. Howell, D.C. and First Rio Valley Medical, P.A.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Reynolds, Shannon, Miller, Blinn, White & Cook v. Flanary
872 S.W.2d 248 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1993)