In Re Ronald Hecht and RAH Contractors, Inc. v. the State of Texas

Opinion

Opinion issued April 11, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

2

Relators’ petition does not comply with the requirements enumerated in Texas

Rules of Appellate Procedure 52.7. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7 (relator “must file”

record with mandamus petition containing “certified or sworn copy of every

document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in any

underlying proceeding”). In the absence of a record, this Court cannot evaluate the

merits of relators’ petition. See e.g., In re Edwards, No. 01-22-00063-CR, 2022 WL

710078, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Mar. 10, 2022, orig. proceeding

[mand. denied]) (mem. op.).

Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus without

prejudice to refile a petition for writ of mandamus that complies with the Texas

Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). All pending motions are

dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Countiss, and Rivas-Molloy.

Footnotes

1. NO. 01-24-00215-CV ——————————— IN RE RONALD HECHT AND RAH CONTRACTORS, INC., Relators Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus MEMORANDUM OPINION Relators, Ronald Hecht and RAH Contractors, Inc. (collectively, “relators”), have filed a petition for a writ of mandamus requesting that this Court “issue a writ of mandamus” directing the trial court to “not require disclosure of [relators’] privileged information and trade secrets.”1 1 The underlying case is Ronald Hecht and RAH Contractors, Inc. v. Avi Ron and Urban Meridian Group, Inc., Cause No. 2021-82564, in the 133rd District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Jaclanel McFarland presiding.