Court Opinion

ID: 9905342
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-29 07:08:20.803843+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:04.881691
License: Public Domain

DENIED and Opinion Filed November 27, 2023

                                    S  In The
                            Court of Appeals
                     Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                               No. 05-23-00593-CV

                   IN RE CHRISTOPHER TORRES, Relator

          Original Proceeding from the 302nd Judicial District Court
                            Dallas County, Texas
                     Trial Court Cause No. DF-22-12902

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
                   Before Justices Reichek, Smith, and Kennedy
                             Opinion by Justice Smith
      In his June 13, 2023, petition for writ of mandamus, relator seeks relief from

the trial court’s May 11, 2023, order granting a motion to correct and reform the

parties’ mediated settlement agreement.

      Entitlement to mandamus relief requires a relator to show that the trial court

clearly abused its discretion and that the relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy.

In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig.

proceeding). The relator bears the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient

record to show he is entitled to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex.

1992) (orig. proceeding).
      Relator’s petition, however, does not comply with the Texas Rules of

Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(2). Rule 52.7(a)(2) requires the

relator to file with the petition “a transcript of any relevant testimony from any

underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in evidence.” Id. (emphasis

added). Here, relator filed with his petition a transcript from the relevant underlying

proceeding, but not any of the exhibits that the transcript shows were offered and

admitted into evidence at the hearing. The trial court issued the challenged order

based on its consideration of this evidence. Without the evidence’s inclusion in the

mandamus record, relator has not carried his burden.

      Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We also lift the stay

issued by this Court’s July 28, 2023, Order.

                                            /Craig Smith/
                                            CRAIG SMITH
                                            JUSTICE
230593F.P05

                                         –2–