in Re: J. Michael Hershey ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •  

     

     

     

                                  NUMBER 13-06-052-CV

     

                                                COURT OF APPEALS

     

                                     THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

     

                                        CORPUS CHRISTI- EDINBURG

    ______________________________________________________________

     

                                         IN RE: J. MICHAEL HERSHEY

     _____________________________________________________________

     

    On Petition for Writs of Mandamus

    and Prohibition

    _______________________________________________________________________

     

                                         MEMORANDUM OPINION   

     

                           Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Castillo

                                    Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam[1]

     


    On February 6, 2006, relator, J. Michael Hershey, filed a petition for writs of mandamus and prohibition, in which he requested this Court to direct the Respondent, the Honorable Daniel R. Sklar, presiding judge of the 329th Judicial District Court of Wharton County, Texas, to withdraw his (1) Supplemental Order of Partition and (2) Amended Order on Motion to Require the Parties to Pay Expenses.  Relator also requested that this Court employ the writ of prohibition to prohibit Respondent from (1) proceeding under the Supplemental Order of Partition or the Supplemental Report of Commissioners and (2) taxing costs disproportionately against Relator. 

    Real parties-in-interest filed a preliminary response on February 17, 2006.  The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writs of mandamus and prohibition and the preliminary response, is of the opinion that relator=s petition should be denied.  Accordingly, relator=s petition for writs of mandamus and prohibition is DENIED.[2]

    Per Curiam

     

     

    Memorandum opinion delivered and filed

    this the 22nd day of February, 2006.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    [1] See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(d) (AWhen denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so.@); Tex. R. App. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).

    [2] See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-06-00052-CV

Filed Date: 2/22/2006

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/11/2015