in Re State Farm Lloyds and Richard Freymann ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                   NUMBER 13-14-00527-CV
    COURT OF APPEALS
    THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
    IN RE STATE FARM LLOYDS AND RICHARD FREYMANN
    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Longoria
    Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam1
    Relators, State Farm Lloyds and Richard Freymann,2 have filed a petition for writ
    of mandamus requesting that this Court direct respondent, the Honorable Rose Guerra
    Reyna, Presiding Judge of the 206th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, to withdraw
    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).
    2  The named relators as provided in the style of this original proceeding include State Farm Lloyds
    and Richard Freymann; however, the relators listed in the “Identity of Parties and Counsel” also includes
    Rosanna Baca. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1 (providing the required contents for the caption of the original
    proceeding). The petition states that “Rosanna Baca had not answered at the time the [order subject to
    review herein] was issued but has filed a plea in abatement which has not yet been ruled on by
    Respondent.” Because Baca is not seeking any relief regarding the order at issue in this petition for writ
    of mandamus, we do not consider her to be a relator in this original proceeding. See 
    id. R. 52.2
    (stating
    that the “party seeking the relief is the relator”).
    her order denying relators’ verified plea in abatement and to enter an order abating the
    suit for damages brought against relators by the real party in interest, Alexandra Morales,
    until sixty days after she provides relators with a notice letter for her claim stating the
    specific, separate amounts for the claimed damages and attorney’s fees. See TEX. INS.
    CODE ANN. § 541.154 (West, Westlaw through 2013 3d C.S.) (“Prior Notice of Action”); 
    id. § 541.155
    (West, Westlaw through 2013 3d C.S.) (“Abatement”); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1
    (“Commencement” of Original Proceedings). In addition, relators request that this Court
    issue immediate temporary relief staying respondent’s order denying the plea in
    abatement. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10 (“Temporary Relief”).
    The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus
    and the applicable law, is of the opinion that the petition for writ of mandamus should be
    denied for the reasons expressed in our opinion in In re State Farm Lloyds, Richard
    Freymann, and Nathan Burris, No. 13-14-00347-CV, 
    2014 WL 4243701
    , at **4–9 (Tex.
    App.—Corpus Christi Aug. 27, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op).          Accordingly, the
    Court DENIES the petition for writ of mandamus and request for immediate temporary
    relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d).
    PER CURIAM
    Delivered and filed the
    19th day of September, 2014.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-14-00527-CV

Filed Date: 9/19/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/16/2015