In Re Ruth Shammas v. the State of Texas

Court of Appeals of Texas

In Re Ruth Shammas v. the State of Texas

DecidedAugust 15, 2024

Docket14-24-00471-CV

StatusPublished

This text of In Re Ruth Shammas v. the State of Texas (In Re Ruth Shammas 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.

Bluebook

In Re Ruth Shammas v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 15, 2024.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-24-00471-CV

IN RE RUTH SHAMMAS, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 129th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2023-72474

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On June 27, 2024, relator Ruth Shammas filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable Michael Gomez, presiding judge of the 129th District Court of Harris County, to vacate the trial court’s April 23, 2024 order granting defendant’s motion to set aside default judgment and for new trial. On June 19, 2024, relator sent a “Notice to the Court” requesting we hold consideration of this original proceeding until her counsel has the opportunity to supplement her petition with certified copies of the trial court’s reporter’s record and clerk’s record. The notice did not provide a time frame for supplementation. To date, relator has not supplemented her petition

As the party seeking relief, relator has the burden of providing this Court with a sufficient mandamus record to establish the relator’s right to relief. In re French, No. 14-24-00287-CV, 2024 WL 2931075, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] June 11, 2024, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (per curiam) (citing In re Watt, No. 05-19-00977-CV, 2019 WL 4233380, at *2 (Tex. App.—Dallas Sept. 16, 2019, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)). Because relator has not met her burden and her petition does not comply the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we dismiss without prejudice relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j), (k)(1)(A); see also 52.7(a)(1)-(2).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Wilson.

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

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 15, 2024.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-24-00471-CV

IN RE RUTH SHAMMAS, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 129th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2023-72474

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On June 27, 2024, relator Ruth Shammas filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable Michael Gomez, presiding judge of the 129th District Court of Harris County, to vacate the trial court’s April 23, 2024 order granting defendant’s motion to set aside default judgment and for new trial. On June 19, 2024, relator sent a “Notice to the Court” requesting we hold consideration of this original proceeding until her counsel has the opportunity to supplement her petition with certified copies of the trial court’s reporter’s record and clerk’s record. The notice did not provide a time frame for supplementation. To date, relator has not supplemented her petition

As the party seeking relief, relator has the burden of providing this Court with a sufficient mandamus record to establish the relator’s right to relief. In re French, No. 14-24-00287-CV, 2024 WL 2931075, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] June 11, 2024, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (per curiam) (citing In re Watt, No. 05-19-00977-CV, 2019 WL 4233380, at *2 (Tex. App.—Dallas Sept. 16, 2019, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)). Because relator has not met her burden and her petition does not comply the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we dismiss without prejudice relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j), (k)(1)(A); see also 52.7(a)(1)-(2).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Wilson.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

In Re Ruth Shammas v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ruth-shammas-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.