In Re: State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and Jeri Charlotte Ramos Appeal from County Court at Law No. 2 of Dallas County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DENIED and Opinion Filed December 1, 2023 In the Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-01209-CV IN RE STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY AND JERI CHARLOTTE RAMOS, Relators Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-23-02251-B MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Carlyle, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Carlyle Before the Court are relators’ November 30, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus and emergency motion for temporary relief. In their petition, relators challenge a trial court order compelling their respective depositions. In their emergency motion, relators seek to stay the depositions pending our action on the petition. Entitlement to mandamus relief requires a relator to show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that the relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). The relator bears the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record to show it is entitled to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Relators’ petition does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See, e.g., TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1), 52.7(a)(2). For instance, relator attempted to swear to the authenticity of the documents in the record using an attorney’s verification. But the verification is defective because it is written in relation to a separate lawsuit and is signed by an attorney who does not appear to be counsel of record. Alternatively, notwithstanding these defects, after reviewing relator’s petition and the record before us, we conclude that relator has failed to demonstrate entitlement to mandamus relief. See In re State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 0523-01062-CV, 2023 WL 7984390, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Nov. 17, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). We also deny relators’ emergency motion for temporary relief as moot. 231209f.p05 /Cory L. Carlyle// CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE –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.
