Pablo Soliz, Baldemar Solis, and Jose Soliz v. James M. McCormack ( 1994 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS,

AT AUSTIN









NO. 3-94-463-CV





PABLO SOLIZ, BALDEMAR SOLIS, AND JOSE SOLIZ,

RELATORS

vs.





JAMES M. MCCORMACK,

RESPONDENT

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

PER CURIAM

Relators Pablo Soliz, Baldemar Solis [sic], and Jose Soliz filed a "Motion Asking for Order Allowing Relators to File Writ of Mandamus without Violating Rule 2.15 of the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure" in this Court. Respondent is James M. McCormack, general counsel of the State Bar of Texas. Relators apparently complain of the State Bar's handling and disposition of grievance proceedings.

By letter, the Clerk requested relators to tender a motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus, a petition, and a brief in support of the petition if they wished to seek mandamus relief from this Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 121. Relators respond that they may not do so without violation of Rule 2.15 of the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure which provides for the confidentiality of district grievance committee proceedings. Tex. Disciplinary R. Prof. Conduct 2.15 (State Bar Rules art. X, § 9).

However, this Court may issue a writ of mandamus only to enforce its jurisdiction or "against a judge of a district or county court in the court of appeals district." Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221(a), (b) (West 1988). Even were relators to submit the appropriate motion to invoke our jurisdiction, we have no authority to issue a writ of mandamus against respondent. Accordingly, we overrule relators' motion and dismiss this original proceeding for want of jurisdiction.

Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Jones and Kidd

Original Proceeding Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: September 21, 1994

Do Not Publish