In Re Travis Price Dorsett v. the State of Texas

Court of Appeals of Texas

In Re Travis Price Dorsett v. the State of Texas

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided March 10, 2023·No. 03-23-00124-CV·Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-23-00124-CV

In re Travis Price Dorsett

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator Travis Price Dorsett filed a suit in Travis County seeking to divorce real party in interest, his wife Laura Elizabeth Dorsett, and effected service on Laura. Weeks later, Laura filed a suit in Bexar County seeking to divorce Travis and filed in Travis County a plea in abatement and motion to dismiss Travis’s suit asserting that venue for the divorce proceeding should be in Bexar County rather than Travis County because neither party satisfied the residency requirements that would permit the suit to be in Travis County. See Tex. Fam. Code § 6.301. After a hearing, the trial court granted Laura’s motion in part and abated the case until further order. Following that ruling, Travis filed his petition for writ of mandamus asking this Court to direct the trial court to vacate its order and conclude that venue was proper in Travis County. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221; Tex. R. App. P. 52.1. After reviewing the petition and the accompanying record, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3, .7, .8 (setting out requirements for obtaining mandamus relief and requiring court to deny petition if court determines that relator is not entitled to relief sought); In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (explaining that to be entitled to mandamus relief

relator must show both that trial court abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate remedy by appeal); see also In re Green, 385 S.W.3d 665, 669 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012, orig. proceeding) (explaining that requirements of domicile and residence under section 6.301 are fact issues for trial court to determine); In re Rowe, 182 S.W.3d 424, 426 (Tex. App.— Eastland 2005, orig. proceeding) (noting that residency must be established as of date lawsuit is filed).

Thomas J. Baker, Justice

Before Justices Baker, Kelly, and Smith Filed: March 10, 2023

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

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-23-00124-CV

In re Travis Price Dorsett

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator Travis Price Dorsett filed a suit in Travis County seeking to divorce real party in interest, his wife Laura Elizabeth Dorsett, and effected service on Laura. Weeks later, Laura filed a suit in Bexar County seeking to divorce Travis and filed in Travis County a plea in abatement and motion to dismiss Travis’s suit asserting that venue for the divorce proceeding should be in Bexar County rather than Travis County because neither party satisfied the residency requirements that would permit the suit to be in Travis County. See Tex. Fam. Code § 6.301. After a hearing, the trial court granted Laura’s motion in part and abated the case until further order. Following that ruling, Travis filed his petition for writ of mandamus asking this Court to direct the trial court to vacate its order and conclude that venue was proper in Travis County. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221; Tex. R. App. P. 52.1. After reviewing the petition and the accompanying record, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3, .7, .8 (setting out requirements for obtaining mandamus relief and requiring court to deny petition if court determines that relator is not entitled to relief sought); In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (explaining that to be entitled to mandamus relief

relator must show both that trial court abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate remedy by appeal); see also In re Green, 385 S.W.3d 665, 669 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012, orig. proceeding) (explaining that requirements of domicile and residence under section 6.301 are fact issues for trial court to determine); In re Rowe, 182 S.W.3d 424, 426 (Tex. App.— Eastland 2005, orig. proceeding) (noting that residency must be established as of date lawsuit is filed).

Thomas J. Baker, Justice

Before Justices Baker, Kelly, and Smith Filed: March 10, 2023

In Re Travis Price Dorsett v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Pincite

In Re Travis Price Dorsett v. the State of Texas (In Re Travis Price Dorsett v. the State of Texas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related