in Re Yasemin Turan ( 2019 )

NUMBER 13-19-00078-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
IN RE YASEMIN TURAN
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Hinojosa
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa 1
Relator Yasemin Turan filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on
February 20, 2019. Through this original proceeding, Turan seeks to compel the trial
court to vacate its temporary orders pertaining to grandparent access and visitation and
to dismiss the case. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 153.433 (West, Westlaw through 2017
1st C.S.).
1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in
any other case,” but when “denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do
so.”); id. R. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).
To obtain relief by writ of mandamus, a relator must establish that the trial court
committed a clear abuse of discretion and that there is no adequate remedy by appeal.
In re Nationwide Ins. Co. of Am., 494 S.W.3d 708, 712 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding); 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). The relator
bears the burden of proving both requirements. In re H.E.B. Grocery Co., 492 S.W.3d
300, 302 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 840.
Mandamus relief is available if a trial court grants a grandparent’s request for temporary
access to grandchildren where the grandparent fails to prove by a preponderance of the
evidence that denial of possession of or access to the child would significantly impair the
child’s physical health or emotional well-being. See In re Scheller, 325 S.W.3d 640, 643
(Tex. 2010) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); In re Derzapf, 219 S.W.3d 327, 335 (Tex.
2007) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); In re J.M.G., 553 S.W.3d 137, 140 (Tex. App.—El
Paso 2018, orig. proceeding).
As the party seeking relief, the relator has the burden of providing the Court with a
sufficient mandamus record to establish her right to mandamus relief. Walker v. Packer,
827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding); In re Athans, 458 S.W.3d 675, 676
(Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015, orig. proceeding); see TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)
(specifying the required contents for the appendix); id. R. 52.7(a) (specifying the required
contents for the record). Rules 52.3 and 52.7 require the relator to provide certified or
sworn copies of specified documents, including any order complained of, any other
document showing the matter complained of, and every document that is material to the
relator’s claim for relief that was filed in any underlying proceeding. See id. R.
2
52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1). The relator is also required to file a properly authenticated
transcript of any relevant testimony from any underlying proceeding, including any
exhibits offered into evidence, or a statement that no testimony was adduced in
connection with the matter. See id. R. 52.7. In sum, the relator bears the “critical
obligation to provide the reviewing court with a complete and adequate record.” In re Le,
335 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, orig. proceeding).
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus,
the response filed by real parties in interest, Norma Sonia Castaneda and Roberto
Castaneda, and the applicable law, is of the opinion that Turan has not met her burden
to obtain mandamus relief because she failed to provide the Court with a record which
complies with the appellate rules. Absent a sufficient record, this Court cannot determine
whether Turan is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny Turan’s request for
emergency relief, which was previously carried with the case, and we deny the petition
for writ of mandamus without prejudice.
LETICIA HINOJOSA
Justice
Delivered and filed the
22nd day of March, 2019.
3