Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2006

in Re: Lawrence W. Few

in Re: Lawrence W. Few
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided April 20, 2006

in Re: Lawrence W. Few

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

 

 

                                                                              )

                                                                              )

                                                                              )

                                                                              )               No.  08-06-00084-CV

                                                                              )

IN RE:  LAWRENCE W. FEW                            )                    AN ORIGINAL

                                                                              )

                                                                              )     PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS     

                                                                              )

                                                                              )    

                                                                              )

 

 

OPINION  PETITION  FOR  WRIT  OF  MANDAMUS

 


Relator Lawrence W. Few has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus, complaining that the trial court is violating his due process rights by not allowing enough funds to be released from his estate in the pending divorce proceeding, thereby denying him his right to retain counsel of his choice in the pending divorce action and in other criminal cases.  Further, Relator complains that the trial court has issued discovery sanction orders, which are overly broad, hostile and prejudicial to Relator, and affect his ability to prepare his defense.  Mandamus will lie only to correct a clear abuse of discretion.  Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 840 (Tex. 1992)(orig. proceeding).  Moreover, there must be no other adequate remedy at law.  Id.  Relator has not provided a record that demonstrates his entitlement to relief.  See Tex.R.App.P. 52.3(j)(1), 52.7(a).  Based on the record before us, we are unable to conclude that Respondent clearly abused his discretion or that Relator has no other adequate remedy.  Accordingly, we deny mandamus relief.  See Tex.R.App.P. 52.8(a).

 

 

 

April 20, 2006

DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Justice

 

Before Barajas, C.J., McClure, and Chew, JJ.

McClure, J., Not Participating

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.