In Re: Exxon Mobil Corporation v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

DENIED and Opinion Filed February 13, 2024
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-23-01219-CV
IN RE EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, Relator
Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 3
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. CC-21-04071-C
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Pedersen, III, Nowell, and Miskel
Opinion by Justice Nowell
Before the Court is relator’s January 30, 2024 amended petition for writ of
mandamus. Relator challenges respondent Honorable Sally Montgomery’s
February 7, 2023 Order denying relator’s Motion to Dismiss for Forum Non
Conveniens and November 20, 2023 Order denying relator’s Motion to Vacate Order
Denying Its Motion to Dismiss for Forum Non Conveniens and to Reconsider and
Continue the Stay. Relator also appears to challenge an Order dated May 26, 2023
wherein the Honorable Martin Hoffman denied relator’s motion to recuse Judge
Montgomery.
Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court
clearly abused its discretion and that relator lacks an adequate appellate
remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig.
proceeding). To the extent relator seeks mandamus relief against Judge
Montgomery, after reviewing relator’s amended petition and the record before us,
we conclude relator has failed to demonstrate entitlement to mandamus relief.
To the extent relator seeks mandamus relief against Judge Hoffman, relator’s
amended petition does comply with rule 52.3(a), (d), (f), (h), or (i). Thus, relator’s
amended petition does not meet the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure for consideration of mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.2, 52.3(a),
(d), (f), (h), (i); see also In re Jones, Nos. 05-23-00492-CV, 05-23-00493-CV, 2023
WL 4101440, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas June 21, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).
Even if we review the amended petition and record before us, we conclude that
relator failed to demonstrate entitlement to mandamus relief against Judge Hoffman.
Accordingly, we deny relator’s amended petition for writ of mandamus. TEX.
R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
–2–
Also before the Court is relator’s January 18, 2024 Verified Motion for
Temporary Relief and to Stay the Case Pending Resolution of the Pending
Mandamus Petition. We deny the motion as moot.
231219f.p05 /Erin A. Nowell//
ERIN A. NOWELL
JUSTICE
–3–