in Re David Earl Stanley ( 2014 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-14-00378-CV
____________________
IN RE DAVID EARL STANLEY
_______________________________________________________ ______________
Original Proceeding
________________________________________________________ _____________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
David Earl Stanley filed an original petition for a writ of mandamus to
compel the Judge of the 258th District Court to rule on motions that Stanley filed
in a forfeiture proceeding. Stanley states that he filed the motions pro se while
represented by counsel. “[A] trial court is under no mandatory duty to accept or
consider pleadings filed pro se by a party who is represented by counsel.” In re
Sondley, 990 S.W.2d 361, 362 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, orig. proceeding); see
also Tex. R. Civ. P. 7. We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
PETITION DENIED.
1
PER CURIAM
Submitted on September 24, 2014
Opinion Delivered September 25, 2014
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
2