in Re: Castro Enterprises, Inc. ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                                      COURT OF APPEALS
    EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    EL PASO, TEXAS
    §
    IN RE
    §               No. 08-09-00260-CV
    CASTRO ENTERPRISES, INC.,                         §             An Original Proceeding
    §                   in Mandamus
    RELATOR
    §
    OPINION ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
    Relator, Castro Enterprises, Inc., asks this Court to issue a writ of mandamus against the
    Honorable Javier Alvarez, sitting by assignment for the 34th District Court of El Paso County,
    Texas. The Relator has the burden of providing this Court with a record sufficient to establish its
    right to mandamus relief. See TEX .R.APP .P. 52.7(a); Walker v. Packer, 
    827 S.W.2d 833
    , 837 (Tex.
    1992)(holding it is the relator’s burden to provide this Court with a sufficient record to establish his
    or her right to mandamus relief). The record filed by Relator is deficient for two reasons. First, there
    is no index for the two-volume, 592-page appendix. TEX .R.APP .P. 52.7(c)(2)(requiring an index
    listing the materials filed and describing them in sufficient detail to identify them).1 Second, Relator
    has not provided a reporter’s record of the hearing on its motion to compel arbitration nor has it
    explained why a reporter’s record will not be filed. See TEX .R.APP .P. 52.7(a)(2)(requiring relator
    1
    In the verification of the mandamus record, Relator’s counsel refers to Tabs 1 through
    14, but the various documents contained in the appendix are not separated by tabs. Although not
    specifically required by Rule 52.7, common sense dictates that documents in an appendix should
    be separated by tabs or that a voluminous appendix be accompanied by an index with page
    numbers indicating where each document begins in the same way that an index is prepared for a
    clerk’s record in an appeal.
    to file with the petition a properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from any
    underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in evidence, or a statement that no testimony
    was adduced in connection with the matter); 
    Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837
    . Given the state of the
    record before us, we conclude Relator has failed to show it is entitled to mandamus relief.
    Accordingly, we deny mandamus relief. See TEX .R.APP .P. 52.8(a).
    November 18, 2009
    DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Chief Justice
    Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Rivera, JJ.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-09-00260-CV

Filed Date: 11/18/2009

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/9/2015