in Re Constance Anthony

NUMBER 13-17-00706-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
IN RE CONSTANCE ANTHONY
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Contreras and Benavides
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Valdez1
By pro se petition for writ of mandamus filed on December 27, 2017, relator
Constance Anthony seeks to compel the preparation of a court reporter’s record for use
in a related appeal: Constance Anthony v. Seaside Rentals, currently pending in our
Court in cause number 13-17-00178-CV. Anthony asserts that she is indigent and entitled
to preparation of the record. On January 4, 2018, in the related appeal, the court reporter
1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in
any other case,” but when “denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do
so.”); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).
filed a motion for extension of time to file the record and acknowledged that Anthony is
entitled to appeal without paying the fee for the record.
Because Anthony has already received the relief that she requests in this original
proceeding, this original proceeding no longer presents a justiciable controversy and has
been rendered moot. See Heckman v. Williamson Cty., 369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012)
(“A case becomes moot if, since the time of filing, there has ceased to exist a justiciable
controversy between the parties—that is, if the issues presented are no longer ‘live,’ or if
the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.”); In re Kellogg Brown &
Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding) (stating that a case
becomes moot “if a controversy ceases to exist between the parties at any stage of the
legal proceedings”); State Bar of Tex. v. Gomez, 891 S.W.2d 243, 245 (Tex. 1994)
(stating that, for a controversy to be justiciable, there must be a real controversy between
the parties that will be actually resolved by the judicial relief sought); see also In re Smith
Cty., 521 S.W.3d 447, 455 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2017, orig. proceeding).
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus
and the applicable law, is of the opinion that this petition for writ of mandamus is moot.
Accordingly, we DISMISS this original proceeding and all relief sought therein as moot.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). Anthony’s appeal remains pending in this Court and will
proceed in due course.
ROGELIO VALDEZ
CHIEF JUSTICE
Delivered and filed this
9th day of January, 2018.
2