In Re Stewart J. Guss & Associates, PLLC and Evette Hooper v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 26, 2024
Docket01-23-00613-CV
StatusPublished

This text of In Re Stewart J. Guss & Associates, PLLC and Evette Hooper v. the State of Texas (In Re Stewart J. Guss & Associates, PLLC and Evette Hooper 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 Stewart J. Guss & Associates, PLLC and Evette Hooper v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

Opinion issued March 26, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-23-00613-CV ——————————— IN RE STEWART J. GUSS & ASSOCIATES, PLLC AND EVETTE HOOPER, Relators

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relators, Stewart J. Guss & Associates, PLLC and Evette Hooper, filed an

“Amended Petition for Writ of Mandamus”1 challenging the trial court’s August 22,

2023 order denying their “Plea to the Jurisdiction, and, in the Alternative, Plea in

1 Relators initially filed a petition for writ of mandamus on August 22, 2023, prior to the trial court issuing an order denying their “Plea to the Jurisdiction, and, in the Alternative, Plea in Abatement.” On September 7, 2023, relators filed an “Amended Petition for Writ of Mandamus,” challenging the trial court’s August 22, 2023 order. Abatement,” in the underlying legal malpractice lawsuit brought by real parties in

interest, Jasleen Minhas, individually and as next friend of M.M. and J.M., minors,

and Dharampal Minhas (collectively, the “real parties”).2 Relators requested that the

“Court grant [their] Petition for Writ of Mandamus, order [the trial court] to vacate

its August 22, 2023 ruling denying [r]elators’ pleas to the jurisdiction and pleas in

abatement, and order [the trial court] to enter an order dismissing or abating [real

parties’] claims.”

Our review of relators’ amended mandamus petition reflects that relators have

failed to establish that they are entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny

relators’ amended petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). All

pending motions are dismissed as moot.

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

2 The underlying case is Jasleen Minhas, as Next Friend of M.M. and J.M., Minors, and Dharampal Minhas, Cause No. 2022-40947, in 164th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable C. Elliott Thornton presiding.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re Stewart J. Guss & Associates, PLLC and Evette Hooper v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-stewart-j-guss-associates-pllc-and-evette-hooper-v-the-state-of-texapp-2024.