Full text
in Re of H.F.C., a Child
NUMBER 13-18-00693-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
IN RE H.F.C., A CHILD
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa 1
Yasemin Turan filed a “Notice of Intent to File a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Motion to Stay” in the above cause on December 28, 2018 but did not file the petition for writ of mandamus. An original proceeding must be commenced before an appellate court obtains jurisdiction to grant relief by motion under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. In re Terminix Int’l, Co., 131 S.W.3d 651, 653 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2004, orig. proceeding); In re Ramirez, 133 S.W.3d 664, 664–65 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2003, orig. proceeding); In re Kelleher, 999 S.W.2d 51, 52 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, orig. proceeding); see also In re H.L., No. 03-15-00407-CV, 2015 WL 4448839, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin July 14, 2015, orig. proceeding). Until an appropriate petition is filed, there is no dispute before this Court. See In re Ramirez, 133 S.W.3d at 664–65; In re Kelleher, 999 S.W.2d at 52.
Because relator has not filed a petition for writ of mandamus, we conclude we have no jurisdiction to consider the motion to stay. Accordingly, this matter is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION without prejudice to relator’s right to reassert the motion after commencing an original proceeding pursuant to the appellate rules. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1, 52.10.
LETICIA HINOJOSA Justice
Delivered and filed the 3rd day of January, 2019.
Footnotes
[1] See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case,” but when “denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so.”); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).