Case Name: Chester R. MORRIS, Petitioner, v. Sam A. HOERSTER and John T. Middleton, Respondents; Chester R. MORRIS, Petitioner, v. Joseph R. SMILEY et al., Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1963-07-31
Citations: 370 S.W.2d 451
Docket Number: Nos. A-9664, A-9665
Parties: Chester R. MORRIS, Petitioner, v. Sam A. HOERSTER and John T. Middleton, Respondents. Chester R. MORRIS, Petitioner, v. Joseph R. SMILEY et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 370
Pages: 451–451

Head Matter:
Chester R. MORRIS, Petitioner, v. Sam A. HOERSTER and John T. Middleton, Respondents. Chester R. MORRIS, Petitioner, v. Joseph R. SMILEY et al., Respondents.
Nos. A-9664, A-9665.
Supreme Court of Texas.
July 31, 1963.
Rehearing Denied Oct. 2, 1963.
Chester R. Morris, petitioner pro se.
Waggoner Carr, Atty. Gen., Austin, Pat Bailey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We agree with the result reached by the Court of Civil Appeals. 368 S.W.2d 639. However, we do not agree with the Court of Civil Appeals that petitioner's recourse in denial of a bill of discovery brought in conjunction with pending litigation, though brought as an independent action, is only by way of mandamus in the Supreme Court. The reasoning in Crane v. Tunks, 160 Tex. 182, 328 S.W.2d 434, does not necessarily apply where a bill of discovery has been denied.
The applications for writ of error are refused, n. r. e. Rule 483, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.