In Re: Michael Kennedy--Appeal from 3rd District Court of Anderson County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 12-08-00205-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS § IN RE: MICHAEL KENNEDY, RELATOR § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING § MEMORANDUM OPINION Michael Kennedy seeks a writ of mandamus requiring the district court to appoint a judge to decide a civil rights lawsuit that Kennedy alleges he has filed in which he names all of the Anderson County district judges as parties. Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and was intended to be available only in situations involving manifest and urgent necessity and not for grievances that may be addressed by other remedies. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 840 (Tex.1992). For Kennedy to be entitled to relief by mandamus, he must meet two requirements. First, he must show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion. See id. Second, he must show that he lacks an adequate remedy at law, such as an ordinary appeal. See id. Kennedy s mandamus petition contains no factual allegations supporting his request for relief. See TEX . R. APP . P. 52.3(g). Moreover, his petition does not include an appendix, see TEX . R. APP . P. 52.3(j)(1)(A), and is not accompanied by a record. See TEX . R. APP . P. 52.7(a)(1). Consequently, we are unable to conclude that the district court has abused its discretion. Kennedy s petition for writ of mandamus is denied. JAMES T. WORTHEN Chief Justice Opinion delivered May 21, 2008. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J. (PUBLISH)
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.
