In Re Takasha Francis v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Takasha Francis v. the State of Texas (In Re Takasha Francis 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.
Opinion
Opinion issued February 13, 2024
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00092-CV ——————————— IN RE TAKASHA FRANCIS, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, TaKasha Francis, filed a petition for writ of mandamus related to the
underlying trial court case, filed by real party in interest, the Honorable Robert K.
Schaffer, against real parties in interest, Mike Doyle, in his representative capacity
as the Chair of the Harris County Democratic Party, and the Harris County
Democratic Party.1
1 The underlying case is Robert K. Schaffer v. Mike Doyle, in his Representative Capacity as Chair of the Harris County Democratic Party, and the Harris County In connection with her mandamus petition, Francis also filed an “Emergency
Motion for Temporary Relief and Stay.” In her motion, Francis requested that the
Court “stay[] the [February 8, 2024] trial setting so” the merits of her mandamus
petition “may be considered” by this Court. However, on February 6, 2024, Francis
filed an “Update on Relator’s Request for Emergency Stay,” notifying the Court of
a February 5, 2024 trial court hearing in which the trial court granted Francis’s
request for emergency continuance of the February 8, 2024 trial setting.
Accordingly, Francis stated that she was “withdraw[ing] her request for an
Emergency Stay of the February 8, 2024 trial setting.”
Our review of Francis’s mandamus petition reflects that she has failed to
establish that she is entitled to mandamus relief. See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d
833, 840 (Tex. 1992). Accordingly, we deny Francis’s petition for writ of
mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). We further deny as moot Francis’s
“Emergency Motion for Temporary Relief and Stay,” and dismiss any other pending
motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Farris.
Democratic Party, Case No. 2024-02303, in the 269th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Christi Kennedy, sitting by assignment, presiding.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Takasha Francis v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-takasha-francis-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.