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

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
• Decided: February 10, 2026
• Docket: 01-24-00225-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued February 10, 2026

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00225-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 writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s February 19, 2024 order granting

the motion to compel the deposition of a State Farm corporate representative filed

by real party in interest, Jennifer Coleman.1 On June 21, 2024, relator notified this

1 The underlying case is Jennifer Coleman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., Cause No. 2023-33122, in the 133rd District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Nicole V. Perdue presiding. Court that the Texas Supreme Court had granted oral argument in a similar case, and

that the “resolution of the issues” in that case would “likely guide this Court’s

resolution of the pending issues” in this original proceeding.

Accordingly, on August 20, 2024, the Court abated this original proceeding

pending resolution of the Texas Supreme Court case and directed relator to notify

the Court of the resolution of that case in the Texas Supreme Court. On April 29,

2025, relator notified the Court that the Texas Supreme Court had resolved that case

but requested that the abatement continue “until the parties [could] complete

mediation on May 8, 2025.” On May 27, 2025, relator notified the Court that the

parties settled this case at mediation and would “notify this Court when the

settlement [was] complete.”

On January 22, 2026, relator filed a letter notifying the Court that settlement

had been completed and the trial court cause had been dismissed. Relator therefore

requested that “the Court . . . dismiss this case in the court of appeals.”

We construe relator’s January 22, 2026 letter as a motion to voluntarily

dismiss this original proceeding. The motion does not include a certificate of

conference stating whether real party in interest opposed dismissal of the original

proceeding. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5). However, more than ten days have

passed, and no party has responded to the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.3(a)(2).

2 We therefore reinstate this original proceeding to the Court’s active docket,

lift the stay imposed by our March 22, 2024 order, grant relator’s motion, and

dismiss this mandamus proceeding. All other pending motions are dismissed as

moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Caughey, and Dokupil.