Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2014

in Re Phillip Wade Hanna

in Re Phillip Wade Hanna
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided August 29, 2014

in Re Phillip Wade Hanna

Opinion

Opinion filed August 29, 2014

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals __________ No. 11-14-00205-CV __________ IN RE PHILLIP WADE HANNA

Original Mandamus Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, Phillip Wade Hanna, has brought a mandamus action against the Honorable Michael Moore, Judge of the 29th District Court of Palo Pinto County, Texas. He alleges that Judge Moore has not ruled on a motion that Relator filed with the district court in which he sought enforcement or sanctions in connection with his ex-wife’s failure to deliver certain property in accordance with the divorce decree. On August 15, 2014, we requested a response from the real party in interest, Lora Kay Hanna. Lora contends in her response that Relator has not paid a filing fee for the pleadings that he has mailed to the district court, nor has he filed an affidavit of indigency. Lora also notes that Relator has not requested that citation be issued, nor has citation been served on her in the enforcement action.

Thus, Lora alleges that there are no pleadings that are properly before the trial court on which the trial court has failed to rule.

Although Relator attached to his petition for writ of mandamus a copy of his motion for enforcement, a letter to Lora’s attorney enclosing his motion, a letter to Judge Moore requesting that he set a hearing on the motion, and two letters to the district clerk regarding his motion, Relator did not attach certified or sworn copies of those documents as required under TEX. R. APP. P. 52. In addition, as Lora points out in her response, Relator was required to pay a filing fee to initiate his suit to enforce the divorce decree and was required to notify Lora of the suit by citation. See TEX. FAM. CODE. ANN. § 9.001 (West Supp. 2013); TEX. R. CIV. P. 99, 106–07, 110, 124–26, 145. Relator has not shown that he has met either of these requirements. Therefore, we hold that Relator has not presented us with sufficient documentation to demonstrate that he is entitled to mandamus relief. See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992).

We deny Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

August 29, 2014 Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson, J., and Bailey, J.

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