in Re Kenneth Hickman-Bey, Relator

NO. 07-10-0224-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL B
AUGUST 5, 2010
______________________________
In re: KENNETH HICKMAN-BEY,
Relator
_______________________________
On Original Proceeding for Writ of Mandamus
_______________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.
Pending before the court is the application of Kenneth Hickman-Bey, for a writ of
mandamus. He asks us to order the Honorable Ron Enns, 69th District Court, to
schedule a hearing and act upon various motions pending in a suit he initiated. The
motions include “Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment,” and “Plaintiff’s
Motion for Change of Venue.” We dismiss the petition as moot.
On June 22, 2010, we directed Judge Enns to respond to relator’s petition for
mandamus. On July 14, 2010, Judge Enns filed his response wherein he granted
relator’s motion for teleconferencing regarding his “unresolved pleadings.” A copy of
the document evincing the action is attached to this opinion as Exhibit A.
Accordingly, we do not reach the merits of the issues raised, and the petition for
writ of mandamus is dismissed as moot. See In re Duncan, 62 S.W.3d 333, 334 (Tex.
App.–Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding). This dismissal is without prejudice to
the relator’s right to seek a writ of mandamus should unreasonable delay arise in the
scheduling of the teleconference and ruling upon the aforesaid motions and pleadings.
Per Curiam
2
3
4