in Re: Waterside Corporation and James M. Rosenberg

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 17, 2016
• Docket: 05-16-00924-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

DENY; and Opinion Filed August 17, 2016.

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-00924-CV

IN RE WATERSIDE CORPORATION AND JAMES M. ROSENBERG, Relators

Original Proceeding from the 95th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-09833

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Lang and Brown Opinion by Justice Brown Before the Court is relators’ petition for writ of mandamus in which they seek review of

the denial of their motion to disqualify counsel and denial of their motion to stay trial court

proceedings. The facts and issues are well known to the parties, so we need not recount them

here.

To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court has clearly

abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co.,

148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Based on the record before us, we

conclude relators have not shown they are entitled to the relief requested. See TEX. R. APP. P.

52.8(a); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we DENY relators’ petition for writ of mandamus and we DENY AS

MOOT relators’ emergency motion for stay of trial court proceedings.

/Ada Brown/ ADA E. BROWN JUSTICE

160924F.P05