in Re Harold Goldberg

Opinion issued November 9, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas ————————————

NO. 01-17-00794-CV ———————————

IN RE HAROLD GOLDBERG, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this mandamus proceeding, relator contends that the trial court abused its discretion by granting a motion for new trial.1 We lack jurisdiction over the associate judge.2

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

Panel consist of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes and Brown.

(holding that court of appeals does not have jurisdiction over associate judge). We note that the Texas Legislature has recently changed our mandamus jurisdiction to encompass associate judges. See Act of May 27, 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., ch. 1013, H.B. 1480, § 1 (to be codified as an amendment to TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221). However, the change in the statute applies to suits filed after September 1, 2017. Id. § 2 (“Section 22.221(b) . . . as amended by this Act, applies only to a suit . . . filed on or after the effective date of this Act.”). Because the underlying suit was filed prior to September 1, 2017, we lack jurisdiction.