in Re Mohammad Mahmood, Relator

In The
Court of Appeals
Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
No. 07-22-00093-CV
IN RE MOHAMMAD MAHMOOD, RELATOR
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
April 19, 2022
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before QUINN, C.J., and PIRTLE and DOSS, JJ.
Relator Mohammad Mahmood, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of
mandamus with this Court seeking to compel the Honorable Daniel H. Mills, sitting by
assignment as judge of the 368th District Court of Williamson County in trial court cause
number 19-3679-FC1, to disqualify opposing counsel and recuse himself. We dismiss
the original proceeding for want of jurisdiction.
Appellate courts may issue writs of mandamus against a judge of a district or
county court in its geographic district and may issue writs necessary to enforce its
jurisdiction. TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(a), (b). Mahmood directs his mandamus
petition against the judge of the 368th District Court of Williamson County. The latter is
not a court located within the geographic district for the Seventh Court of Appeals, but,
instead, one located within the district of the Third Court of Appeals. See TEX. GOV’T
CODE ANN. § 22.201(d), (h). Thus, we lack authority to issue a writ a mandamus against
the judge of the 368th District Court unless the writ is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction.
Although Mahmood has an appeal presently pending before this Court, i.e. In the
Interest of A.M., cause number 07-22-00011-CV, that appeal was transferred from the
Third Court of Appeals by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization
efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001. The transfer did not carry with it any
jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus in a separate original proceeding. See In re
Barnes, No. 06-17-00042-CV, 2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 2784, at *2 (Tex. App.—Texarkana
Mar. 31, 2017, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); Misc. Docket No. 21-9153 (Tex. Dec. 22,
2021) (“It is specifically provided that the cases ordered transferred by this Order shall, in
each instance, not include original proceedings . . . .”). And, Mahmood has not shown
how the relief sought via the pending application for a writ of mandamus is necessary to
enforce our appellate jurisdiction in cause number 07-22-00011-CV. See In re Jackson,
No. 08-20-00026-CV, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 1003, at *2-3 (Tex. App.—El Paso Feb. 5,
2020, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (dismissing original proceeding where relator failed to
show that mandamus was necessary to preserve the court’s appellate jurisdiction over a
transferred appeal).
For these reasons, we dismiss Mahmood’s petition for writ of mandamus and
accompanying motion for temporary relief for want of jurisdiction.
Per Curiam
Pirtle, J., concurs in the result.
2