In Re: Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance CompanyAppeal from 298th Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion )

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Deny and Opinion Filed April 22, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-00457-CV IN RE HARTFORD LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Relator Original Proceeding from the 298th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC 12 02312-M MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Moseley, Fillmore, and Lewis Opinion by Justice Moseley The Court has before it Relator s petition for writ of mandamus. Relator s petition does not satisfy the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. The petition is not properly certified. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j); In re Butler, 270 S.W.3d 757, 758 (Tex. App. Dallas 2008, orig. proceeding). The appendix is also incomplete. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a); In re Le, 335 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) ( Those seeking the extraordinary remedy of mandamus must follow the applicable procedural rules. Chief among these is the critical obligation to provide the reviewing court with a complete and adequate record. ). Additionally, only members of the state bar of Texas and persons licensed by the Texas Supreme Court may practice law in Texas. TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 81.102(a), (b) (West 2013); Rabb Int'l, Inc. v. SHL Thai Food Serv., LLC, 346 S.W.3d 208, 210 11 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.). Although the petition for writ of mandamus is signed by a member of the Texas Bar, the signature block also includes two lawyers who are not members of the Texas Bar. Although they represent that they have been admitted to practice pro hac vice, they have not moved for, and we have not granted, admission pro hac vice in this mandamus proceeding. A trial court s grant of a motion for admission for pro hac vice status does not apply to an original proceeding in this Court. TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 82.0361 (West 2013); see Moreno v. State, 246 S.W.3d 380, 380 (Tex. App. Amarillo 2008, no pet.) (per curiam). On the record before the Court, Relator has not shown it is entitled to relief. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8 (a). Accordingly, the Court DENIES the petition for writ of mandamus. /Jim Moseley/ JIM MOSELEY JUSTICE 140457F.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.