In RE: Terrence M. Gore Appeal from 302nd Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion )

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DENY; and Opinion Filed December 1, 2015. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-15-01426-CV IN RE TERRENCE M. GORE, Relator Original Proceeding from the 302nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF12-12707-U MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Francis, Myers, and Schenck Opinion by Justice Myers Relator filed this petition for writ of mandamus complaining that he had been deprived of his right to a jury trial in this suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Relator states that a “bench order” has been signed with regard to the proceeding, but a final judgment has not been signed. By separate motion for emergency relief, he requests that the Court stay rendition of final judgment pending determination of his petition for writ of mandamus. Relator also complains that the trial judge failed to recuse herself despite the fact that she was a respondent in a federal habeas corpus proceeding filed by relator. Ordinarily, to obtain mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Relator has an adequate remedy by appeal for both of his complaints. In re Johnson, 238 S.W.3d 846, 848 (Tex. App.— El Paso 2007, orig. proceeding) (although trial court may have erred in denying jury trial mandamus relief not appropriate because appeal provided an adequate remedy at law); In re Rice, 04-15-00343-CV, 2015 WL 3616073, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio June 10, 2015, orig. proceeding) (same); In re McKee, 248 S.W.3d 164, 165 (Tex. 2007) (mandamus not available for the denial of a motion to recuse); TEX. R. CIV. P. 18a(j)(1)(A) (complaint regarding failure to recuse may be reviewed only on appeal from final judgment). We DENY the petition. /Lana Myers/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE 151426F.P05 –2–

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.