Court Opinion

ID: 4437603
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-09-12 14:14:42.19425+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:53:13.923652
License: Public Domain

In The

                                  Court of Appeals

                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                                __________________

                                NO. 09-19-00282-CV
                                __________________

                              IN RE JAMES ATKINS

__________________________________________________________________

                           Original Proceeding
           435th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas
                    Trial Cause No. 10-09-09576-CV
__________________________________________________________________

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Relator James Atkins filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus, in which

he complains that the trial court erred by denying his motion for judgment nunc pro

tunc and asserts that the trial court lacked jurisdiction.

      Mandamus will issue only to correct a clear abuse of discretion or violation

of a duty imposed by law when that abuse cannot be remedied 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). After reviewing the mandamus record and

                                            1
petition, we conclude that the relator has not demonstrated an abuse of discretion by

the trial court. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

      PETITION DENIED.

                                                    PER CURIAM

Submitted September 11, 2019
Opinion Delivered September 12, 2019

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.

                                         2