DocketNumber: 09-14-00378-CV
Filed Date: 9/25/2014
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/30/2014
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-14-00378-CV ____________________ IN RE DAVID EARL STANLEY _______________________________________________________ ______________ Original Proceeding ________________________________________________________ _____________ MEMORANDUM OPINION David Earl Stanley filed an original petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the Judge of the 258th District Court to rule on motions that Stanley filed in a forfeiture proceeding. Stanley states that he filed the motions pro se while represented by counsel. “[A] trial court is under no mandatory duty to accept or consider pleadings filed pro se by a party who is represented by counsel.” In re Sondley,990 S.W.2d 361
, 362 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, orig. proceeding); see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 7. We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. PETITION DENIED. 1 PER CURIAM Submitted on September 24, 2014 Opinion Delivered September 25, 2014 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 2