in Re T.W. Laquay Dredging, Inc.
Opinion
NUMBER 13-11-00691-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG IN RE T. W. LAQUAY DREDGING, INC. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Benavides
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam1 T. W. LaQuay Dredging, Inc.., filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on October 28, 2011, seeking relief from the trial court’s failure to grant a no- evidence motion for summary judgment and the trial court’s “verbal grant” of the real party in interest’s oral motion for continuance of the hearing on the no-evidence motion for summary judgment.
Ordinarily, mandamus relief lies when the trial court has abused its discretion and a party has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). A trial court abuses its discretion if it reaches a decision so arbitrary and unreasonable as to amount to a clear and prejudicial error of law or if it clearly fails to correctly analyze or apply the law. See In re Cerberus Capital Mgmt., L.P., 164 S.W.3d 379, 382 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding). In determining whether appeal is an adequate remedy, we consider whether the benefits outweigh the detriments of mandamus review. In re BP Prods. N. Am., Inc., 244 S.W.3d 840, 845 (Tex. 2008) (orig. proceeding). Appellate courts may not deal with disputed areas of fact in a mandamus proceeding. In re Pirelli Tire, L.L.C., 247 S.W.3d 670, 676 (Tex. 2007) (orig. proceeding); In re Angelini, 186 S.W.3d 558, 560 (Tex. 2006) (orig. proceeding).
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus under the applicable standard of review, is of the opinion that relator has not shown itself entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 7th day of November, 2011.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.