In Re State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 29, 2023
• Docket: 01-22-00619-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued June 29, 2023

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-22-00619-CV ——————————— IN RE STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, filed a petition

for a writ of mandamus challenging an August 10, 2022 order “compelling three

State Farm depositions,” which were, according to State Farm, “well beyond the

needs of that remaining disputes in this case.”1

1 The underlying case is Willem Ghijsen v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Cause No. 20-DCV-278448, in the 458th District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas, the Honorable Chad Bridges presiding. The August 10, 2022 order challenged by State Farm was signed by the

Honorable Robert Rolnick. Judge Rolnick ceased to hold the office of judge of the

458th District Court of Fort Bend County and was succeeded by the Honorable Chad

Bridges. Accordingly, on February 2, 2023, the Court entered an order substituting

Judge Bridges as the respondent in this original proceeding. See TEX. R. APP. P.

7.2(a). The Court further abated this original proceeding for petition of writ of

mandamus to allow Judge Bridges an opportunity to reconsider the ruling made the

basis of State Farm’s mandamus petition. See TEX. R. APP. P. 7.2(b) (“If the case is

an original proceeding under Rule 52, the court must abate the proceeding to allow

the successor to reconsider the original party’s decision.”).

On February 17, 2023, State Farm filed a letter with the Court. In its letter,

State Farm notified the Court that the trial court held a hearing to allow Judge

Bridges an opportunity to reconsider the August 10, 2022 order and “ordered the

parties to mediation.” On April 19, 2023, State Farm filed a letter with the Court

stating that the parties attended mediation and “settled the disputes at issue in this

original proceeding.” Accordingly, State Farm’s letter “ask[ed] the Court to

dismiss” the original proceeding.

We construe State Farm’s letter as a motion to dismiss the original proceeding

for a petition for writ of mandamus. State Farm’s motion does not include a

certificate of conference, but more than ten days have passed since the motion was

2 filed, and no party has opposed the relief requested in the motion. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 10.3(a)(2).

Accordingly, we reinstate the original proceeding for petition of writ of

mandamus and grant State Farm’s motion and dismiss the petition. We dismiss any

pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Farris.