in Re Jennifer MacHacek in Her Capacity as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Laverne (Toby) Smith ( 2015 )

NUMBER 13-15-00333-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
IN RE JENNIFER MACHACEK IN HER CAPACITY
AS INDEPENDENT ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE
OF LAVERNE (TOBY) SMITH, DECEASED
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria
Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion1
Relator, Jennifer Machacek in her capacity as Independent Administrator of the
Estate of Laverne (Toby) Smith, Deceased, filed a petition for writ of mandamus, a motion
for emergency stay, and an amended motion for emergency stay in the above cause on
June 21, 2015. Through this original proceeding, relator sought to compel the trial court
to vacate its order of July 10, 2015 compelling the production of privileged documents.
1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When 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).
This Court granted the motion for emergency stay and requested that the real parties in
interest, Andrea Gilliland and Sandra Dee Taylor, or any others whose interest would be
directly affected by the relief sought, file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus
on or before the expiration of ten days from the date of this order. Currenty before the
Court is relator’s unopposed motion to dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus.
According to the motion, on July 29, 2015, the trial court withdrew the order that was the
subject of this petition for writ of mandamus. Accordingly, relator requests that we
dismiss this original proceeding.
A court cannot decide a case that has become moot during the pendency of the
litigation. See Heckman v. Williamson Cnty., 369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012). A case
becomes moot if, since the time of filing, there has ceased to exist a justiciable
controversy between the parties or if the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the
outcome. See id. This doctrine applies to original proceedings. See, e.g., In re
Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding).
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus
and the unopposed motion to dismiss, is of the opinion that this matter has been rendered
moot. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the unopposed motion to dismiss, LIFTS the stay
previously imposed by this Court, and DISMISSES the petition for writ of mandamus as
moot. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a), 52.10(b).
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
1st day of September, 2015.
2