In Re: Christine L. Blow and Ken A. Blow Appeal from 219th Judicial District Court of Collin County (memorandum opinion )

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Denied and Opinion Filed December 20, 2016 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-01438-CV IN RE CHRISTINE L. BLOW AND KEN A. BLOW, Relators Original Proceeding from the 219th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219-02930-2015 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang-Miers, Evans, and Schenck Opinion by Justice Evans Before the Court is relators’ petition for writ of mandamus in which they seek relief from the district court’s November 29, 2016 order denying relators’ request to enjoin enforcement of a justice court’s previously issued writ of possession and granting real party in interest U.S. Bank’s request to execute the same writ of possession. The facts and issues are well known to the parties, so we need not recount them here. To be entitled to 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). Based on the record before us, we conclude relators have not shown they are entitled to the relief requested. See Guillen v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 494 S.W.3d 861, 867–68 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, no pet.) (relator’s claim that foreclosure was invalid due to statute of limitations was a title issue independent of the issue of possession and did not bar justice court from determining right to possession); see also TEX. R. CIV. P. 510.9 (permitting appeal to county court of justice court’s final judgment of eviction); TEX. PROP. CODE ANN. § 24.007 (permitting appeal to court of appeals of county court’s final judgment of eviction when premises used for residential purposes only); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a); TEX. R. CIV. P. 510.13; Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. /s/David Evans/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE 161438F.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.