in Re: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, Great American Insurance Company, and MICA Corporation

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 15, 2015
Docket05-15-01114-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in Re: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, Great American Insurance Company, and MICA Corporation (in Re: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, Great American Insurance Company, and MICA Corporation) 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: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, Great American Insurance Company, and MICA Corporation, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

ACCEPTED 05-15-01114-CV 05-15-01114-CV FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 9/15/2015 3:05:55 PM LISA MATZ CLERK

No.__________________________

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FILED IN 5th COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT DALLAS, TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS 9/15/2015 3:05:55 PM ____________________________________________LISA MATZ Clerk IN RE TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA, GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY AND MICA CORPORATION

RELATORS ____________________________________________

FROM THE 95th DISTRICT COURT, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, CAUSE NO. DC-15-04399, HON. KEN MOLBERG, PRESIDING ____________________________________________

RELATORS’ EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TEMPORARY ORDER STAYING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN THE TRIAL COURT PENDING RESOLUTION OF THEIR PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS ____________________________________________

RYAN LOGAN VALDEZ KEVIN SEWELL Texas Bar No. 24037627 Texas Bar No. 00789619 rvaldez@canteyhanger.com sewell@mdjwlaw.com J. FRANK KINSEL, JR. MICHAEL J. WATSON Texas Bar No. 11488700 Texas Bar No. 24008246 jkinsel@canteyhanger.com watson@mdjwlaw.com BRIAN BRISCO MARTIN, DISIERE, JEFFERSON & Texas Bar No. 24073957 WISDOM, LLP bbrisco@canteyhanger.com Tollway Plaza One CANTEY HANGER LLP 16000 N. Dallas Parkway, Suite 600 West 6th Street, Suite 300 Dallas, Texas 75248 Fort Worth, TX 76102 Telephone: (817) 877-2847 Telephone: (817) 877-2800 Facsimile: (817) 333-2947 Facsimile: (817) 877-2807 Attorneys for Relator Great Attorneys for Relator Travelers American Insurance Company Property Casualty Company of America JEFFREY JACK WOLF Texas Bar No. 21849012 jwolf@wolflawpc.com Jack D. Ormond Texas Bar No. 24037217 jormond@wolflawpc.com THE WOLF LAW FIRM, P.C. 1360 North White Chapel Blvd. Southlake, Texas 76092 Telephone: (817) 552-9653 Facsimile: (817) 552-0300 Attorneys for Relator MICA Corporation

2 TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

Come now Relators, Travelers Property Casualty Company of America,

Great American Insurance Company and MICA Corporation (collectively

“Relators”) and, pursuant to TEX. R. APP. PROC. 52.10, file their Emergency

Motion for Temporary Order Staying All Proceedings in the Trial Court Pending

Resolution of Their Petition for Writ of Mandamus and would respectfully show as

follows:

On August 16, 2015, the trial court signed an order denying Relators’

Motion to Transfer Venue. Relators’ Motion demonstrated that venue was

mandatory in Fannin County under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. sec. 15.019.

Relators have filed contemporaneously with this emergency motion a Petition for

Writ of Mandamus seeking review of the trial court’s denial of their Motion to

Transfer Venue.

As a result of the pendency of the petition for writ of mandamus, this Court

is authorized to grant temporary relief and stay the underlying litigation during the

pendency of the appellate proceedings:

The relator may file a motion to say any underlying proceedings or for any other temporary relief pending the court’s action on the petition.

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10(a).

3 The court—on motion of any party or on its own initiative—may without notice grant any just relief pending the court’s action on the petition.

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10(b) (emphasis added).

Venue has always been regarded as an important right in this State. Ruiz v.

Conoco, Inc., 868 S.W.2d 752, 758 (Tex. 1993). “The question of venue is a very

material right.” Fulmore v. Benson, 257 S.W. 697, 701 (Tex. Civ. App.—Austin

1923), rev’d on other grounds, 269 S.W. 71 (Tex. Comm. App. 1929, judg’t

adopted). Indeed, venue is “of vital importance.” City State Bank v. Gribble, 256

S.W.2d 872, 874 (Tex. Civ. App.—Amarillo 1952, no writ).

In fact, venue is so important that if the court makes an improper venue

determination, then “it shall in no event be harmless error and shall be reversible

error.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. sec. 15.064(b) (Vernon 1986). Proper

and early resolution of mandatory venue provisions, such as the one applicable in

this matter, are of such importance that mandamus proceedings are specifically

authorized to enforce those provisions. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. sec.

15.0642.

The right of a defendant to be sued in a particular county necessarily

includes not only the right to have trial conducted there, but also to have all pre-

and post-trial issues ruled on in the statutorily prescribed county. Like special

appearances, proper venue is of such paramount importance that discovery on

4 other issues may be entirely precluded while venue issues are resolved. In re

Alford Chevrolet-Geo, 997 S.W.2d 173, 181 (Tex. 1999) (“courts may limit

discovery pending resolution of threshold issues like venue”); Miller v. State &

County Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 1 S.W.3d 709, 716-17 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1999,

no pet.) (holding that trial court’s abatement precluding all discovery while it

determined venue issues was not an abuse of discretion).

The question of whether the District Court of Dallas County court is the

proper court to adjudicate all the issues in this matter has not yet been resolved by

this Court. However, the Real Party in Interest, John Goin, has moved forward

with discovery sending 76 or more requests for production to each of the Relators

and unilaterally noticing the deposition of Hector Noris, an employee of Relator

MICA. MICA has filed a Motion to Quash the Deposition of Hector Noris on

several bases. The pre-trial issues related to this or any discovery, as well as the

other pre-trial and trial issues associated with this matter, should be decided by a

trial court in the proper county, which Relators would show is a district court in

Fannin County under a mandatory venue provision.

The trial court proceedings should be stayed so that the parties will be

required to submit to the expense and inconvenience of discovery pending

resolution of this mandamus. Lacefield v. Electronic Fin. Group, 21 S.W.3d 799,

800 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.) (discovery stayed during pendency of

5 interlocutory appeal from order denying special appearance because appellant

should not be required to submit to “the expense and inconvenience of discovery

pending resolution of his appeal”).

A stay of all proceedings below is just relief and is necessary to protect

Relators’ rights. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10, 29.3. Relators request this Court to stay all

proceedings, including, but not limited to, discovery, the resolution of discovery

issues, and trial, during the pendency of and until the conclusion of this mandamus

proceeding.

6 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Ryan Logan Valdez /s/ Kevin Sewell RYAN LOGAN VALDEZ KEVIN SEWELL Texas Bar No. 24037627 Texas Bar No. 00789619 rvaldez@canteyhanger.com sewell@mdjwlaw.com J. FRANK KINSEL, JR. MICHAEL J. WATSON Texas Bar No. 11488700 Texas Bar No. 24008246 jkinsel@canteyhanger.com watson@mdjwlaw.com BRIAN BRISCO MARTIN, DISIERE, JEFFERSON & Texas Bar No. 24073957 WISDOM, LLP bbrisco@canteyhanger.com Tollway Plaza One CANTEY HANGER LLP 16000 N.

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

Related

Ruiz v. Conoco, Inc.
868 S.W.2d 752 (Texas Supreme Court, 1994)
Miller v. State & County Mutual Fire Insurance Co.
1 S.W.3d 709 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)
Lacefield v. ELECTRONIC FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.
21 S.W.3d 799 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000)
In Re Alford Chevrolet-Geo
997 S.W.2d 173 (Texas Supreme Court, 1999)
Fulmore v. Benson
257 S.W. 697 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Benson v. Fulmore
269 S.W. 71 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1925)
City State Bank in Wellington v. Gribble
256 S.W.2d 872 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, Great American Insurance Company, and MICA Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-travelers-property-casualty-company-of-america-great-american-texapp-2015.