Court Opinion

ID: 9768647
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 11:08:36.680167+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:42.827534
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                       NO. 03-23-00286-CV

                                   In re Lauren Jane Andersen

                      ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

                             MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Relator Lauren Jane Andersen has filed a petition for writ of mandamus

complaining that the trial court granted the real party in interest’s motion for new trial and related

orders after the court had lost plenary power. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221; see also Tex. R.

App. P. 52. Because Andersen’s suit is a SAPCR governed by the Texas Family Code, we

conclude that the trial court rendered judgment within the meaning of Section 101.026 when it

issued its letter ruling declaring that “the Motion for a New Trial is GRANTED” before it lost

plenary power. See Tex. Fam. Code § 101.026 (“‘Render’ means the pronouncement by a judge

of the court’s ruling on a matter. The pronouncement may be made orally in the presence of the

court reporter or in writing, including on the court’s docket sheet or by a separate written

instrument.”). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and lift our May 17, 2023

stay order. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

                                               __________________________________________
                                               Gisela D. Triana, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Theofanis

Filed: August 25, 2023