in Re: Angelina Arredondo, Individually as Representative of the Estate of Daniel Arredondo, and Next Friend of Minor Children

Denied and Opinion Filed July 1, 2019
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-19-00483-CV
IN RE ANGELINA ARREDONDO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE ESTATE OF DANIEL ARREDONDO, DECEASED AND NEXT FRIEND OF
MINOR CHILDREN, Relators
Original Proceeding from the 44th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-07257
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Myers, Molberg, and Nowell
Opinion by Justice Nowell
The underlying proceeding ended in a mistrial on February 4, 2019 and is scheduled for a
new trial on September 30, 2019. In this original proceeding, relators seek a writ of mandamus
directing the trial court to vacate a February 3, 2019 order sustaining the defendants’ Motion in
Limine No. 18 and to vacate a February 4, 2019 order sanctioning relators’ attorney for violating
Motion in Limine No. 18 and Motion in Limine No. 40. To be entitled to mandamus relief, a
relator must show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no
adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig.
proceeding). Based on the record before us, we conclude relators have not shown they are entitled
to the relief requested. Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX.
R. APP. P. 52.8(a) (the court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to
the relief sought).
/Erin A. Nowell/
ERIN A. NOWELL
JUSTICE
190483F.P05
–2–