In Re: Prairie Link Constructors JV Fluor Enterprises, Inc. And Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc. v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )

DENY and Opinion Filed September 14, 2023
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-23-00892-CV
IN RE PRAIRIE LINK CONSTRUCTORS JV; FLUOR ENTERPRISES,
INC.; AND BALFOUR BEATTY INFRASTRUCTURE, INC., Relators
Original Proceeding from the 160th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-22-13917
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Reichek, Smith, and Kennedy
Opinion by Justice Smith
In this original proceeding, relators seek mandamus relief from the trial
court’s August 24, 2023 order denying discovery. Relators have also filed a motion
to stay the underlying proceedings pending resolution of their petition for writ of
mandamus. We deny the petition, and we deny the stay motion as moot.
Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relators to show that the trial court
clearly abused its discretion and that they lack an adequate remedy by appeal. In re
Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding).
Relators bear the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record to show they
are entitled to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig.
proceeding).
Here, relators have failed to provide sworn or certified copies of every
document material to their claim for relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1) (stating an
appendix must contain “a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of, or any
other document showing the matter complained of”), 52.7(a)(1) (requiring a relator
to file with a petition “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material
to the relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding”).
Relators’ unsworn certification is insufficient to meet Rule 52’s requirements. See
In re Lancaster, No. 05-23-00381-CV, 2020 WL 3267865, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas
May 5, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (attorney’s unsworn declaration wherein
she declared that the facts stated in the declaration were true and correct was
insufficient because it did not invoke penalty of perjury).
Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. Having denied
the petition, we also deny as moot the stay motion.
230892f.p05 /Craig Smith//
CRAIG SMITH
JUSTICE
–2–