Source: http://texas-opinions.com/08-In-Re-McAllen-Medical-Center-Inc-Tex-2008-Dissent-by-Wainwright-HCLC-suit-dismissal-by-mandamus-criticized.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 18:22:43+00:00

Document:
Code on the interlocutory trial court order, Justice Dale Wainwright dissents.
Justice Wainwright, dissenting, joined by Chief Justice Jefferson and Justice O’Neill.
Or say we’re only dreaming . . .
That now I’m in a whole new world with you.
Brad Kane, A Whole New World, on Aladdin (Disney 1992).
notwithstanding the merits of the case, I respectfully dissent.
Aycock v. Clark, 60 S.W. 665, 666 (1901), and before. Id. at 841 n.8; Pope, 445 S.W.2d at 953; cf.
performance of a ministerial duty or act.).
wait for a final judgment to seek judicial review of the decision. Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 839; State v.
S.W.2d 714, 724–27 (Tex. 1998) (Baker, J., concurring and dissenting).
legal error that the appellate court would be unable to correct. In re Kansas City S. Indus., Inc., 139 S.W.
extent they might be read as abolishing or relaxing” the no adequate remedy on appeal requirement.
and Allen v. Humphreys, 559 S.W.2d 798 (Tex. 1977)).
increase the expense and the stakes in the case.
jurisdiction in Texas courts would exact a significant cost to the judicial system that it need not bear.
concludes there is no adequate remedy by appeal. __ S.W.3d __.
AIU Insurance Co., 148 S.W.3d 109 (Tex. 2004) and In re Prudential Insurance Co. of America, 148 S.W.
to the procedure it agreed to waive.”).
adequate expert report, which the trial court denied. Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. art. 4590i § 13.01(d).
denials of motions to dismiss, that right only applies to cases filed after September 1, 2003. Tex. Civ.
part to the denial of the petitions).
has nevertheless refused to comply with governing law that requires dismissal of the case.” Id. at 147.
Court’s opinion only a few years later.
In re AIU are just the beginning.
of Appeals, 808 S.W.2d 56, 60 (Tex. 1991); Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., 787 S.W.2d at 955; Iley, 311 S.
appeal. __ S.W.3d at __.
Code on the interlocutory trial court order, I respectfully dissent.
cases or controversies and interlocutory matters.
 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(a).
the governor, the court of criminal appeals, or a judge of the court of criminal appeals.” Tex. Gov’t. Code § 22.002(a).
 See Nat’l Med. Enters. v. Godbey, 924 S.W.2d 123, 133 (Tex. 1996) (disqualification of counsel); Able Supply Co. v.
12 (Tex. 1994) (outcome determinative sanctions).
were real parties when the petition was filed in this Court and only eight patients remain in this proceeding.
sanctions under the MLIIA may not always be reviewable on appeal after a final judgment).
interlocutory orders. The Court misconstrues my position on the propriety of the Legislature to make policy.

References: v. 
 v.

 v. 
 art. 4590
 § 13
 § 51
 § 22
 v. 
 v.