in Re: Jesse Gunn

DENY; and Opinion Filed October 8, 2014.
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-01249-CV
IN RE JESSE GUNN, Relator
Original Proceeding from the 199th Judicial District Court
Collin County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 199-54301-2013
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices O'Neill, Lang, and Brown
Opinion by Justice O'Neill
Relator filed this petition for writ of mandamus requesting that the Court order the trial
court to dismiss the child support claims against him for lack of personal jurisdiction. The facts
and issues are well-known the parties so we do not recount them here. The relator’s petition
does not comply with the rules of appellate procedure and is incomplete. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k),
52.7(a); In re Butler, 270 S.W.3d 757, 759 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, orig. proceeding) (denying
petition for writ of mandamus because petition and record not authenticated as required by the
Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure).
By failing to provide a complete mandamus record, the relator has failed to demonstrate
that he established a lack of personal jurisdiction in the trial court. A defendant challenging a
Texas court's personal jurisdiction must negate all possible bases for asserting personal
jurisdiction. BMC Software Belgium, N.V. v. Marchand, 83 S.W.3d 789, 793 (Tex. 2002) (citing
Kawasaki Steel Corp. v. Middleton, 699 S.W.2d 199, 203 (Tex. 1985)). The family code
provides that a Texas trial court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant
in a proceeding to establish or enforce a support order or to determine parentage when:
(1) the individual is personally served with citation in this state;
(2) the individual submits to the jurisdiction of this state by consent, by entering a
general appearance, or by filing a responsive document having the effect of
waiving any contest to personal jurisdiction;
(3) the individual resided with the child in this state;
(4) the individual resided in this state and provided prenatal expenses or support
for the child;
(5) the child resides in this state as a result of the acts or directives of the
individual;
(6) the individual engaged in sexual intercourse in this state and the child may
have been conceived by that act of intercourse;
(7) the individual asserted parentage in the paternity registry maintained in this
state by the bureau of vital statistics; or
(8) there is any other basis consistent with the constitutions of this state and the
United States for the exercise of personal jurisdiction.
TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 159.201 (West 2014). The mandamus record does not show that in the
trial court the relator conclusively negated all these possible bases for personal jurisdiction under
the family code. Accordingly, the relator has not established that the trial court clearly abused its
discretion in denying his plea to the jurisdiction. We DENY the petition for writ of mandamus.
TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8.
/Michael J. O'Neill/
MICHAEL J. O'NEILL
141249F.P05 JUSTICE
–2–