Court Opinion

ID: 9882110
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-05 08:28:49.589439+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:19.278839
License: Public Domain

In The
                              Court of Appeals
                     Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

                                   No. 07-23-00325-CV

                       IN RE AALIYAH TELESFORD, RELATOR

                               ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

                                    October 2, 2023
                            MEMORANDUM OPINION
                     Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and DOSS, JJ.

      Aaliyah Telesford petitions this court for a writ of mandamus. Said petition is

directed at a “report” and temporary orders issued by Associate Judge Stephen L.

Johnson affecting her parent-child relationship with KAJ. It and the issues addressed

therein are the subject of a timely request for de novo review filed under § 201.015 of

the Texas Family Code. We deny the petition.

      Normally, temporary orders are unappealable, thereby rendering them appropriate

fodder for consideration via a petition for writ of mandamus. In re Telesford, No. 07-23-

00167-CV, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 4201, at *5 (Tex. App.—Amarillo June 14, 2023, orig.

proceeding) (mem. op.). Yet, the situation before us falls outside that norm. The report
and orders in question were issued by an associate judge whose decisions are reviewable

through a de novo hearing. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 201.015(a) (so providing). In

such a hearing, all issues upon which review is sought are tried anew. In re R.R., 537

S.W.3d 621, 622–23 (Tex. App.—Austin 2017, orig. proceeding).              And, Telesford

requested a de novo hearing “on all pending issues, to include but not limited to standing,

jurisdiction, conservatorship, possession, access, injunctions, wage withholding order,

and child support to include health insurance and medical expenses.” Thus, we conclude

that an adequate remedy at law by appeal exists through which her complaints may be

addressed. See In re McIntire, No. 07-22-00249-CV, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 60, at *1–2

(Tex. App.—Amarillo Jan. 5, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (stating that relief is

available only to correct a clear abuse of discretion when there is no adequate remedy at

law by appeal). That remedy is the trial de novo by the 99th Judicial District Court

requested by Telesford.

      We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

                                                       Brian Quinn
                                                       Chief Justice

                                            2