Relator, Clyde Nubine, filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on November 14, 2008, seeking to compel the District Clerk of Bee County to perform her ministerial functions, including, inter alia, filing pleadings and rescinding filing fees.

We do not have jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. This Court does not have mandamus jurisdiction over district clerks unless it is shown that issuance of the writ is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221(a), (b) (Vernon 2004); In re Washington, 7 S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding); In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding); see also In re Nubine, No. 13-08-507-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 6534, at *1 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi Aug. 27, 2008, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op). Relator has neither alleged nor shown that issuance of the writ is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, is of the opinion that we lack jurisdiction to consider this matter. The petition for writ of mandamus is therefore DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this 20th day of November, 2008.

1. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(d) ("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).