Court Opinion

ID: 9393415
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-10 06:08:34.717027+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:53.128592
License: Public Domain

DENIED and Opinion Filed May 3, 2023

                                      In The
                             Court of Appeals
                      Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                No. 05-23-00397-CV

   IN RE 1 COVENTRY COURT, LLC, MOSHE FELDHENDLER, AND
                 LEAH FELDHENDLER, Relators

           Original Proceeding from the 14th Judicial District Court
                            Dallas County, Texas
                     Trial Court Cause No. DC-21-01541

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
                 Before Justices Pedersen, III, Nowell, and Miskel
                         Opinion by Justice Pedersen, III
      In their May 1, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus, relators seek relief from

the trial court’s contempt order.

      Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relators to demonstrate that the trial

court clearly abused its discretion and that they lack an adequate remedy by appeal.

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

proceeding). Relators bear the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record

to show they are entitled to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex.

1992) (orig. proceeding).
      Relators’ record does not comply with the requirements of Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 52. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(2). Without a

sufficient record, relators have failed to carry their burden.

      Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus.

                                             /Bill Pedersen, III//
230397f.p05                                  BILL PEDERSEN, III
                                             JUSTICE

                                          –2–