Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2006

in Re: Calvin G. Dence and East End Lumber Company

in Re: Calvin G. Dence and East End Lumber Company
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided April 26, 2006

in Re: Calvin G. Dence and East End Lumber Company

Opinion

 

                                                                                        

 

 

                                                                                        

 

 

                              NUMBER 13-06-193-CV

 

                         COURT OF APPEALS

 

                     THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

                         CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

 

IN RE: CALVIN G. DENCE AND EAST END LUMBER COMPANY

 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus and

Motion for Emergency Temporary Relief

 

 

                               MEMORANDUM OPINION                                   

 

                         Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

                                 Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

 


On April 25, 2006, relators, Calvin G. Dence and East End Lumber Company, filed a petition for writ of mandamus with this Court.  Relators= petition for writ of mandamus asks this Court to order the Respondents, Scarlet Swoboda, City Secretary for the City of Victoria, Texas, and George Matthews, Victoria County Elections Administrator, to refrain from using all ballots that have been prepared for the May 13, 2006 Election and to prepare new ballots that do not contain a vote on a referendum on Ordinance 2006-2, adding Section 10-30 to the Victoria City Code.  In addition, relators have filed a motion for emergency relief, asking this Court to order a stay so as to maintain the status quo during the pendency of this original proceeding, to immediately refrain from using all ballots that have been prepared for the May 13, 2006 Election, to prepare new ballots that do not contain a vote on a referendum on Ordinance 2006-2, adding Section 10-30 to the Victoria City Code, and to order respondents to file a response to relators= petition for writ of mandamus.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the relators= motion for emergency relief and petition for writ of mandamus, is of the opinion that relators have not shown themselves entitled to the relief sought and the motion for emergency relief and petition for writ of mandamus should be denied.  See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8.  Accordingly, the motion for emergency relief and petition for writ of mandamus are hereby DENIED.

 

PER CURIAM

 

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 26th day of April, 2006.

 

 

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