Court Opinion

ID: 9780888
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 06:08:09.629387+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:34:16.374199
License: Public Domain

DENIED and Opinion Filed August 28, 2023

                                    S   In The
                             Court of Appeals
                      Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                 No. 05-23-00615-CV

                IN RE SHOUVIK BHATTACHARYYA, Relator

           Original Proceeding from the 191st Judicial District Court
                             Dallas County, Texas
                      Trial Court Cause No. DC-21-13508

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
                   Before Justices Reichek, Smith, and Kennedy
                           Opinion by Justice Kennedy

      In his June 22, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus, relator seeks relief from

three trial court orders that, in pertinent part, impose sanctions and compel him to

respond to discovery requests.

      Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court

clearly abused its discretion and that relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy.

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

proceeding). After reviewing relator’s petition, real party’s response, relator’s reply,

and the record before us, we conclude that relator has failed to demonstrate

entitlement to mandamus relief.
      Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P.

52.8(a).

      We also deny relator’s motion for leave to file a reply brief as moot.

      We also lift the stay issued by this Court’s June 23, 2023 Order and modified

by this Court’s July 6, 2023 Order.

                                           /Nancy Kennedy/
                                           NANCY KENNEDY
                                           JUSTICE

230615F.P05

                                        –2–