In Re VGP Holdings, LLC v. the State of Texas

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-25-00123-CV

IN RE VGP HOLDINGS, LLC, Relator

Original Proceeding 1

Sitting: Irene Rios, Justice Lori Massey Brissette, Justice Velia J. Meza, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 21, 2025

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED AS MOOT

On February 24, 2025, relator VGP Holdings, LLC filed an original proceeding in this

court seeking a writ of mandamus instructing the district court to overturn its February 14, 2025

order granting real party in interest, Kappa Texas Oil Corp., an ex parte temporary restraining

order (TRO). Relator also filed an emergency motion for temporary relief seeking a “stay of the

trial court’s February 14, 2024 Temporary Restraining Order,” and a mandamus record.

Later that same day, the real party in interest filed a response to the emergency motion and

a supplement to the mandamus record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(b). On March 4, 2025, the real

party in interest filed a supplemental response to the emergency motion and a second and third

supplement to the mandamus record. After reviewing the mandamus petition, the emergency

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2025CI03426, styled Kappa Texas Oil Corp. v. VGP Holdings LLC et al., pending in the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Rosie Alvarado presiding. 04-25-00123-CV

motion, the mandamus record, the supplemental mandamus records, and the response to the

emergency motion, we concluded relator was not entitled to the relief sought in its emergency

motion and denied the motion.

On March 21, 2025, relator filed a fourth supplement to the mandamus record, followed

by a fifth supplement on May 5, 2025. The May 5, 2025 supplement to the mandamus record

shows that on April 22, 2025, the trial court lifted the real party in interest’s TRO and denied its

motion for a temporary injunction.

After considering the petition, the emergency motion, the response, the supplemental

response, and the mandamus record and supplements thereto, we conclude relator’s petition for

writ of mandamus is now moot. Accordingly, we deny as moot the petition for writ of mandamus.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a), (d).

-2-