Court Opinion

ID: 9960773
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-17 06:12:11.159292+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:52.268372
License: Public Domain

DENIED and Opinion Filed April 15, 2024

                                    S  In The
                             Court of Appeals
                      Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                No. 05-24-00423-CV

                         IN RE KHOR CHIN LIM, Relator

           Original Proceeding from the 298th Judicial District Court
                             Dallas County, Texas
                      Trial Court Cause No. DC-24-04421

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION
                   Before Justices Pedersen, III, Smith, and Garcia
                              Opinion by Justice Smith
      Before the Court is relator’s April 9, 2024 petition for writ of mandamus

wherein relator asks this Court to compel the trial court to vacate its purported order

denying his ex parte motion for temporary restraining order, vacate its purported

judgment dismissing the case, and grant the temporary restraining order.

      Upon review, relator’s petition does not meet the requirements of the Texas

Rules of Appellate Procedure for consideration of mandamus relief. See In re

Backusy, No. 05-23-00674-CV, 2023 WL 4540278, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas July

14, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1, 52.2, 52.3(a)–

(h), 52.3(j)–(k), 52.7(a).
      For example, it is relator’s burden to provide the Court with a sufficient record

to show entitlement to mandamus relief. In re Skinner, No. 05-23-00930-CV, 2023

WL 6618295, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 11, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.);

see also TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A) (requiring a relator to file “a certified or sworn

copy of any order complained of, or any other document showing the matter

complained of”); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1) (requiring a relator to file “a certified or

sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and

that was filed in any underlying proceeding”). Relator failed to file the order and

judgment complained of or any other document material to his claim for relief.

      Relator also failed to certify that the person filing the petition has reviewed

the petition and concluded that every factual statement is supported by competent

evidence included in the appendix or record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j). Without a

certified petition and authenticated record, relator has failed to carry his burden to

provide a sufficient record. See In re Skinner, No. 05-23-01077-CV, 2023 WL

8230683, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Nov. 28, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).

      Further, relator’s petition lacks a statement of facts supported by citations to

competent evidence included in an appendix or record, and it does not include a

“clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to

authorities and to the appendix or record.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(g), (h). The

petition is also missing the following: a list identifying the parties and counsel, a

table of contents, an index of authorities, a statement of the case, a statement of

                                          –2–
jurisdiction, and a statement of the issues presented. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(a)–(c),

(d)(1)–(3), (e), (f).

       Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

                                            /Craig Smith/
                                            CRAIG SMITH
240423F.P05                                 JUSTICE

                                         –3–