DENIED and Opinion Filed May 10, 2023

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00421-CV IN RE 1 COVENTRY COURT, LLC, MOSHE FELDHENDLER, AND LEAH FELDHENDLER, Relators Original Proceeding from the 14th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-21-01541 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Pedersen, III, Nowell, and Miskel Opinion by Justice Miskel In their May 5, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus, relators seek relief from the trial court’s contempt order.

Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relators to demonstrate that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that they lack an adequate remedy by appeal.

In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Relators bear the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record to show they are entitled to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).

Relators’ record does not comply with the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(2). Specifically, the petition and record indicate that there were two hearings in connection with the contempt order from which relators seek mandamus relief. Relators did not include a properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from such contempt hearings or a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the contempt order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(2). Without a sufficient record, relators have failed to carry their burden.

Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus.

/Emily A. Miskel// 230421f.p05 EMILY MISKEL JUSTICE

–2–