in Re: Robert Croysdill ( 2020 )

COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
§
IN RE § No. 08-19-00299-CV
ROBERT CROYSDILL, § AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
Relator. § IN MANDAMUS
§
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator Robert Croysdill, pro se, has filed a mandamus petition against the Honorable Dick
Alcala, judge of the 34th District Court. Croysdill alleges that Judge Alcala has failed to follow
this Court's mandate on remand from a related appeal.1 The petition for writ of mandamus is
denied.
Generally, mandamus relief is appropriate only to correct a clear abuse of discretion or to
compel the performance of a ministerial duty, and where the relator has no adequate remedy by
appeal. In re Reece, 341 S.W.3d 360, 364 (Tex. 2011) (orig. proceeding). The burden is on the
relator to show he is entitled to mandamus relief. See In re Ford Motor Company, 165 S.W.3d
315, 317 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding). After reviewing the mandamus petition and record, we
1
See Croysdill v. Old Republic Ins. Co., 490 S.W.3d 287, 290-91 (Tex.App.--El Paso 2016, no pet.).
conclude that Relator has failed to show that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we
deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
JEFF ALLEY, Chief Justice
January 23, 2020
Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
(Do Not Publish)
2