NO. 12-14-00076-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: 

ERIC PINK,

RELATOR

§

§

§

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator Eric Pink complains that the trial court awarded interim attorney’s fees for a 

purpose other than the safety and welfare of the child and seeks a writ of mandamus directing the 

court to vacate its order.1 We deny the petition.

Mandamus relief is proper only to correct a clear abuse of discretion when there is no 

adequate remedy by appeal. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 

(Tex.2004); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839 (Tex.1992). A trial court has no discretion 

in determining what the law is or applying the law to the facts. Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 840. 

Thus, a clear failure by the trial court to analyze or apply the law correctly is an abuse of 

discretion. Id. An appellate remedy is “adequate” when any benefits to mandamus review 

outweigh the detriments. In re Prudential, 148 S.W.3d at 136.

A party seeking mandamus relief must generally bring forward all that is necessary to 

establish the claim for relief. See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837; In re Le, 335 S.W.3d 808, 813 

(Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, orig. proceeding); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 52. Therefore, 

it is Pink’s burden to provide this court with a sufficient record to establish his right to 

mandamus relief. See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837; In re Le, 335 S.W.3d at 813.

When a petition for writ of mandamus is filed, it must be accompanied by an appendix 

that includes a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of, or any other document 

 

1 The respondent is the Honorable Carole Clark, Judge of the 321st Judicial District Court of Smith County, 

Texas. The real party in interest is Marcie Anna Pink-Woods.
2

showing the matter complained of. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A). Unless voluminous or 

impracticable, the appendix must also include the text of any statute or other law (excluding case 

law) on which the relator’s argument is based. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(C). And the 

petition must also be accompanied by a record. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a). Here, Pink did not file 

the required appendix and record along with his mandamus petition. Therefore, we are unable to 

determine whether he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, Pink’s petition for writ of 

mandamus is denied.

SAM GRIFFITH

Justice

Opinion delivered April 17, 2014.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

APRIL 17, 2014

NO. 12-14-00076-CV

ERIC PINK,

Relator

V.

HON. CAROLE W. CLARK,

Respondent

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed 

by ERIC PINK, who is the respondent in Cause No. 11-1601-D, pending on the docket of the 

321st Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having 

been filed herein on March 25, 2014, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the 

opinion of this Court that a writ of mandamus should not issue, it is therefore CONSIDERED, 

ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, 

hereby DENIED.

Sam Griffith, Justice.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.