in Re Pedison USA, Inc. and Dickson Ewemade
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-16-00252-CV
IN RE PEDISON USA, INC. AND RELATORS DICKSON EWEMADE
----------
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
TRIAL COURT NO. 048-263530-13 ----------
DISSENTING MEMORANDUM OPINION1 ----------
A trial court possesses a ministerial duty to rule upon a motion filed and pending before it; mandamus may issue to compel the trial court to rule. See, e.g., In re Shredder Co., 225 S.W.3d 676, 679 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2006, orig. proceeding); In re Hearn, 137 S.W.3d 681, 685 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004, orig. proceeding); Safety–Kleen Corp. v. Garcia, 945 S.W.2d 268, 269 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, orig. proceeding). A trial court abuses its discretion by failing to rule when the trial court had a legal duty to perform a nondiscretionary act, was asked to perform the act, and failed or refused to do so. See Shredder Co., 225 S.W.3d at 679; Hearn, 137 S.W.3d at 685; Safety–Kleen Corp., 945 S.W.2d at 269.
Relators Pedison USA, Inc. and Dickson Ewemade are third-party defendants in the underlying litigation. They seek mandamus relief based, in part, on the trial court’s failure to rule on their motion to sever and transfer venue.2 Despite the fact that Relators’ motion has been pending over six months, despite two written requests by Relators that the trial court rule on their motion, and despite an upcoming August 1, 2016 trial setting, the trial court has not ruled on Relators’ motion to sever and transfer venue. The trial court’s failure to rule and to sign a written order prevents this court from considering the merits of Relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A) (requiring relator to attach a certified or sworn copy of order complained of); In re Reynolds, 369 S.W.3d 638, 647 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2012, orig. proceeding) (recognizing denial of motion to sever and transfer venue is reviewable by mandamus).
After reviewing Relators’ petition for writ of mandamus and the response of Real Parties in Interest, I would conditionally grant a writ of mandamus––to the extent Relators seek a written order reflecting a ruling on their motion to sever and transfer venue––requiring the trial court to sign a written order ruling on Relators’ motion to sever and transfer venue on or before July 29, 2016. See Tex. R. App. 52.8(b). Because the majority does not, I respectfully dissent.
/s/ Sue Walker SUE WALKER JUSTICE DELIVERED: July 27, 2016
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.