Court Opinion

ID: 3196483
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-04-21 15:16:56.109506+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:23:27.766101
License: Public Domain

In The

                               Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                             _________________
                              NO. 09-16-00115-CV
                             _________________

IN RE STEVE WATKINS, SMW PROJECTS, INC., RONALD WINTHROP,
     WINTHROP & ASSOCIATES, INC., AND LARRY D. ROBISON

________________________________________________________________________

                               Original Proceeding
                 60th District Court of Jefferson County, Texas
                           Trial Cause No. B-195,177
________________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Steve Watkins and SMW Projects, Inc., joined by Ronald Winthrop and

Winthrop & Associates, Inc., and Larry D. Robison, petition for a writ of

mandamus commanding that the 60th District Court of Jefferson County: (1)

transfer Cause No. B-195,177 to Harris County; (2) grant Relators’ motions for a

continuance of their responses to motion for summary judgment; (3) vacate its

order quashing party and expert depositions; (4) order the real parties in interest,

Burrow Global Construction, LLC and Burrow Global, LLC to identify which

                                         1
documents are responsive to which requests for production; (5) vacate its order

sustaining objections by the real parties in interest, Gary Knight and Michael

Burrow, to discovery; and (6) vacate its order setting aside deemed admissions by

Knight and Burrow. After reviewing the petition for writ of mandamus and the

mandamus record that accompanied the petition, we conclude that the relators have

not shown that they are entitled to mandamus relief. See In re Prudential Ins. Co.

of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding); Walker v. Packer,

827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). We deny the petition

seeking mandamus relief without prejudice. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). All

pending motions for temporary relief are denied as moot.

      PETITION DENIED.

                                                           PER CURIAM

Submitted on April 15, 2016
Opinion Delivered April 18, 2016

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.

                                        2