in Re: R.B. ( 2022 )


Menu:
  • DENY and Opinion Filed January 24, 2022
    S   In The
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    No. 05-21-01063-CV
    IN RE R.B., Relator
    Original Proceeding from the 330th Judicial District Court
    Dallas County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. DF-13-20408-Y
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before Justices Myers, Partida-Kipness, and Carlyle
    Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness
    In this original proceeding, relator asks this Court for a writ of mandamus
    compelling the trial court to vacate its temporary order changing the conservator
    with the exclusive right to determine the child’s primary residence. We deny the
    petition on the merits, and we deny the motion for temporary relief and emergency
    stay as moot.
    Relator first filed a petition in this case in which she failed to redact
    information that identified her minor child. By order dated December 15, 2021, we
    struck the petition and supporting appendix, and we granted relator leave to file a
    redacted petition in compliance with rule 9.9 of the Texas Rules of Appellate
    Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.9. Relator’s refiled petition includes some
    redactions, but still contains sensitive information that identifies her minor child. In
    the interest of judicial economy, we exercise our discretion to consider the merits of
    her petition before striking it again.
    Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court
    clearly abused its discretion and that she lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re
    Prudential Ins. Co., 
    148 S.W.3d 124
    , 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Based
    on our review of the record, we conclude relator has failed to show her entitlement
    to the relief requested. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). Accordingly, we deny the petition
    for writ of mandamus on the merits, and we deny the motion for temporary relief
    and emergency stay as moot.
    We also strike the petition and supporting appendix for relator’s failure to
    comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.9’s redaction requirements.
    /Robbie Partida-Kipness/
    ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS
    JUSTICE
    211063F.P05
    –2–
    S
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    JUDGMENT
    METHODIST HOSPITALS OF                         On Appeal from the County Court at
    DALLAS D/B/A METHODIST                         Law No. 2, Dallas County, Texas
    MANSFIELD MEDICAL CENTER,                      Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-07083-
    Appellant                                      B.
    Opinion delivered by Justice
    No. 05-21-00039-CV           V.                Goldstein. Justices Molberg and
    Nowell participating.
    CYNTHIA YATES,
    INDIVIDUALLY AND AS
    REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
    ESTATE OF HUBERT YATES,
    Appellee
    In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order
    denying the motion to dismiss of Methodist Hospitals of Dallas d/b/a Methodist
    Mansfield Medical Center is AFFIRMED.
    It is ORDERED that appellee CYNTHIA YATES, INDIVIDUALLY AND
    AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF HUBERT YATES recover her
    costs of this appeal from appellant METHODIST HOSPITALS OF DALLAS
    D/B/A METHODIST MANSFIELD MEDICAL CENTER.
    Judgment entered January 24, 2022.
    –2–
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-21-01063-CV

Filed Date: 1/24/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/26/2022