Court Opinion

ID: 9892865
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-25 06:09:17.56441+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:48:35.288943
License: Public Domain

DENIED and Opinion Filed October 17, 2023

                                    S   In The
                             Court of Appeals
                      Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                No. 05-23-00948-CV

                         IN RE CHI YEN TRAN, Relator

          Original Proceeding from the 469th Judicial District Court
                            Collin County, Texas
                    Trial Court Cause No. 469-55653-2018

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
                   Before Justices Reichek, Smith, and Kennedy
                            Opinion by Justice Reichek
      In her September 27, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus, relator seeks relief

from the trial court’s July 7, 2023 “Agreed Final Order.”

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

Procedure. See, e.g., TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1, 52.3(j), 52.7(a). For instance, a petition

seeking mandamus relief must include a certification stating that the relator “has

reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is

supported by competent evidence included in the appendix or record.” TEX. R. APP.

P. 52.3(j). Relator included such a statement but failed to sign it. The petition,

therefore, lacks an appropriate certification.
      Additionally, Rule 52.7(a)(1) requires the relator to file with her petition “a

certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for

relief that was filed in any underlying proceeding.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1). Rule

52.7(a)(2) requires the relator to file a properly authenticated transcript of any

relevant testimony from any underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered

in evidence, or a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the

matter complained. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(2). The documents contained in relator’s

record are not all certified or sworn copies. And relator failed to include either a

transcript or statement in accordance with rule 52.7(a)(2).

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

                                           /Amanda L. Reichek/
                                           AMANDA L. REICHEK
230948F.P05                                JUSTICE

                                        –2–