in Re Steve Watkins, SMW Projects, Inc., Ronald Winthrop, Winthrop & Associates, Inc., and Larry D. Robinson
This text of in Re Steve Watkins, SMW Projects, Inc., Ronald Winthrop, Winthrop & Associates, Inc., and Larry D. Robinson (in Re Steve Watkins, SMW Projects, Inc., Ronald Winthrop, Winthrop & Associates, Inc., and Larry D. Robinson) 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.
Opinion
In The
Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-16-00115-CV _________________
IN RE STEVE WATKINS, SMW PROJECTS, INC., RONALD WINTHROP, WINTHROP & ASSOCIATES, INC., AND LARRY D. ROBISON
________________________________________________________________________
Original Proceeding 60th District Court of Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. B-195,177 ________________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Steve Watkins and SMW Projects, Inc., joined by Ronald Winthrop and
Winthrop & Associates, Inc., and Larry D. Robison, petition for a writ of
mandamus commanding that the 60th District Court of Jefferson County: (1)
transfer Cause No. B-195,177 to Harris County; (2) grant Relators’ motions for a
continuance of their responses to motion for summary judgment; (3) vacate its
order quashing party and expert depositions; (4) order the real parties in interest,
Burrow Global Construction, LLC and Burrow Global, LLC to identify which
1 documents are responsive to which requests for production; (5) vacate its order
sustaining objections by the real parties in interest, Gary Knight and Michael
Burrow, to discovery; and (6) vacate its order setting aside deemed admissions by
Knight and Burrow. After reviewing the petition for writ of mandamus and the
mandamus record that accompanied the petition, we conclude that the relators have
not shown that they are entitled to mandamus relief. See In re Prudential Ins. Co.
of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding); Walker v. Packer,
827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). We deny the petition
seeking mandamus relief without prejudice. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). All
pending motions for temporary relief are denied as moot.
PETITION DENIED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on April 15, 2016 Opinion Delivered April 18, 2016
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re Steve Watkins, SMW Projects, Inc., Ronald Winthrop, Winthrop & Associates, Inc., and Larry D. Robinson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-steve-watkins-smw-projects-inc-ronald-winthrop-winthrop-texapp-2016.