In Re: State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Robert Nash, and Yulonda Wilson v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 1, 2023
• Docket: 05-23-01206-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Denied and Opinion Filed December 1, 2023

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-01206-CV

IN RE STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, ROBERT NASH, AND YULONDA WILSON, Relators

Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-20-03133-C

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Carlyle, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness Before the Court are relators’ November 29, 2023 petition for writ of

mandamus and emergency motion for temporary relief. In their petition, relators

challenge three trial court orders compelling their respective depositions. In their

emergency motion, relators seek to stay the depositions pending our action on the

petition.

Entitlement to mandamus relief requires a relator to show that the trial court

clearly abused its discretion and that the relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy.

In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig.

proceeding). The relator bears the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record to show it is entitled to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex.

1992) (orig. proceeding). After reviewing relators’ petition and the record before us,

we conclude relators have failed to demonstrate entitlement to mandamus relief. See

In re State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 05-23-01062-CV, 2023 WL 7984390, at

*1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Nov. 17, 2023, orig. proceeding).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P.

52.8(a).

We also deny relators’ emergency motion for temporary relief as moot.

/Robbie Partida-Kipness/ ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS 231206F.P05 JUSTICE

–2–