in Re Rusti Poulton

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: January 16, 2020
• Docket: 06-19-00102-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-19-00102-CV

IN RE RUSTI POULTON

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Stevens MEMORANDUM OPINION On November 27, 2019, Rusti Poulton (Relator) filed this original proceeding in which she

complains of the trial court’s order granting defendant’s motion for leave to add a third-party

defendant. We deny the petition.

After reviewing the record, we conclude that Relator failed to comply with Rule 52.7(a)(1)

of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, which states that a relator must file with her petition

“a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the realtor’s claim for relief and

that was filed in any underlying proceeding[.]” TEX. R. APP. P 52.7(a)(1) (emphasis added).

Although Relator provided various copies of documents from the underlying proceeding, those

copies are not sworn to or certified. Accordingly, the mandamus petition fails to provide a

complete record as required by Rule 52.7(a)(1) and is, therefore, insufficient to establish that the

trial court abused its discretion. See In re Le, 335 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th

Dist.] 2011, orig. proceeding) (“Those seeking the extraordinary remedy of mandamus must follow

the applicable procedural rules. Chief among these is the critical obligation to provide the

reviewing court with a complete and adequate record.” (footnote omitted)).

For this reason, we deny Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

Scott E. Stevens Justice

Date Submitted: January 15, 2020 Date Decided: January 16, 2020