Court Opinion

ID: 9948018
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-06 07:13:25.852262+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:28:55.389723
License: Public Domain

DENIED and Opinion Filed February 27, 2024

                                        In The
                             Court of Appeals
                      Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                  No. 05-24-00192-CV

                         IN RE PHILIP FLOYD, Relator

           Original Proceeding from the 471st Judicial District Court
                             Collin County, Texas
                     Trial Court Cause No. 471-02423-2021

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
        Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Breedlove
                           Opinion by Justice Breedlove
      Before the Court are relator’s February 22, 2024 petition for writ of

mandamus and February 26, 2024 emergency motion for temporary relief. In his

petition, relator challenges a trial court’s turnover order on the basis that the trial

court purportedly refused to allow relator to testify at the turnover hearing. In his

emergency motion, relator seeks a stay of all trial court proceedings pending this

Court’s action on the petition.

      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).

      Relator’s petition does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure. See, e.g., TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(g)–(h), 52.3(k), 52.7(a)(1). For instance,

none of the documents included in relator’s appendix or record are properly certified

or sworn copies. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k), 52.7(a)(1); see also In re Romero, No.

05-23-00922-CV, 2023 WL 6226322, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Sept. 26, 2023, orig.

proceeding) (mem. op.); In re Lancaster, No. 05-23-00381-CV, 2023 WL 3267865,

at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas May 5, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). Additionally,

relator failed to adequately brief how the trial court clearly abused its discretion and

how relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(h).

      Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

      We also deny relator’s emergency motion as moot.

240192f.p05                                 /Maricela Breedlove/
                                            MARICELA BREEDLOVE
                                            JUSTICE

                                          –2–