Court Opinion

ID: 2892008
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-07 21:48:35.587472+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:15:46.219583
License: Public Domain

NO. 07-05-0262-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

JULY 25, 2005

______________________________

In re: CARL DOUGLAS HAYES, 

Relator

_________________________________

Original Proceeding

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Carl Douglas Hayes applied for a writ of mandamus directing Charles Bacarisse, district clerk, to file an original petition he sent to Bacarisse.  We dismiss the application.

We, as an appellate court, have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against an entity other than a trial court only when necessary to enforce our jurisdiction over a pending appeal.  
In re Soto
, No. 07-04-0413-CV, 2004 Tex. App. 
Lexis 
1751 (Tex. App.–Amarillo August 9, 2004, orig. proceeding); 
In re Washington, 
7 S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex. App.— Houston [1
st
 Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding).  Given that Hayes seeks relief against a district clerk for omitting to file an original petition and that the matter does not affect a pending appeal, 
we lack jurisdiction to address the matter.

Accordingly, the application for writ of mandamus is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Brian Quinn

          Chief Justice