in Re Pine Tree Capital, LLC ( 2022 )

Deny and Opinion Filed February 18, 2022
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-22-00105-CV
IN RE PINE TREE CAPITAL, LLC, ET AL, Relators
Original Proceeding from the 191st Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-09-01295
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Molberg, Pedersen, III, and Garcia
Opinion by Justice Molberg
Before the Court are relators’ petition for writ of mandamus, Richard D.
Gaines’ motion to be admitted pro hac vice to represent relators, and resident
practicing Texas attorney’s motion in support of the pro hac vice motion, all filed
February 10, 2022.
The motion by Richard D. Gaines does not comply with the requirements for
participation in Texas proceedings by a non-resident attorney. See TEX. R.
GOVERNING ADMISSION TO THE BAR XIX(d). Although he has not been admitted to
the State Bar of Texas or pro hac vice to represent relators in this case, his
Page 1 of 2
signature block and signature both appear on the petition for writ of mandamus
along with those of a member of the Texas Bar. See In re Hartford Life & Annuity
Ins. Co., No. 05-14-00457-CV, 2014 WL 1613018, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas, Apr.
22, 2014, orig. proceedings) (mem. op.) (improper inclusion on a petition signed
by a resident attorney when neither licensed nor admitted pro hac vice).
Additionally, relators’ petition does not satisfy the requirements of the Texas
Rules of Appellate Procedure. The petition is not properly certified. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 52.3(j). Relators have also failed to provide a complete and properly
certified or sworn record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k) and 52.7(a)(1). Relators
have failed to provide an adequate record for our review.
Accordingly, we deny the motions for Richard D. Gaines to be admitted pro
hac vice to represent relators and we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
/Ken Molberg//
220105f.p05 KEN MOLBERG
JUSTICE
Page 2 of 2