In Re: Sunoco Retail LLC and Derrick Ray Lewis v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 3, 2023
• Docket: 05-22-01225-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

DENIED and Opinion Filed March 3, 2023

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-01225-CV

IN RE SUNOCO RETAIL LLC AND DERRICK RAY LEWIS, Relators

Original Proceeding from the 68th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-18306

MEMORANDUM OPINION ON REHEARING Before Justices Nowell and Goldstein1 Opinion by Justice Nowell Relators filed a motion for rehearing of our November 18, 2022 memorandum

opinion and order denying relief. We deny the motion for rehearing, vacate our

opinion and order of November 18, 2022, and issue this new memorandum opinion

and order denying relief in their stead.

Relators’ November 15, 2022 Petition for Writ of Mandamus challenged the

trial court’s November 14, 2022 Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel

Settlement Amounts and Assess Costs Against Defendant Sunoco Retail, LLC. On

1 The Honorable Justice Myers was originally a member of this panel but did not participate in this opinion because her term expired on December 31, 2022. original submission, the Court denied relief because relators did not provide a

sufficient record to support their request for mandamus relief.

Relators moved for rehearing and provided transcripts of hearings that took

place on October 14, 2022, and November 14, 2022. Because relators removed the

technical grounds upon which the Court’s memorandum opinion rested, the Court

requested a response to the motion for hearing and the underlying merits of relators’

petition for writ of mandamus. We now consider the merits of relators’ petition.

Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relators to show that the trial court

clearly abused its discretion and that relators lack an adequate appellate remedy. In

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

proceeding). After reviewing relators’ petition, the response, relators’ reply, and the

record before us, we conclude that relators have failed to demonstrate a clear abuse

of discretion.

Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 52.8(a).

We also lift the stay issued by this Court’s November 21, 2022 Order.

/Erin A Nowell/ ERIN A. NOWELL 221225F.P05 JUSTICE

–2–