In Re: Ray L. Hunt, et al Appeal from Collin County Probate of Collin County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Denied and Opinion Filed December 28, 2017 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-01389-CV IN RE RAY L. HUNT, R. GERALD TURNER, THOMAS E. MEURER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS A TRUSTEE OF LOYAL TRUST NO. 1, W. KIRK BAKER, DAVID HERNANDEZ, HUNTER LAFAYETTE HUNT, ASHLEE HUNT KLEINERT, AND HEATHER LEIGH HUNT, Relators Original Proceeding from the Collin County Probate Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. PB1-0337-2012 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Fillmore, and Schenck Opinion by Justice Bridges In this original proceeding, relators seek review of an order denying their motion to disqualify opposing counsel. “Mandamus is appropriate to correct an erroneous order disqualifying counsel because there is no adequate remedy by appeal.” In re Cerberus Capital Mgmt., L.P., 164 S.W.3d 379, 383 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding) (quoting In re Sanders, 153 S.W.3d 54, 56 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Therefore, if the trial court abused its discretion by disqualifying counsel, we may grant mandamus relief. See In re Nitla S.A. de C.V., 92 S.W.3d 419, 422 (Tex. 2002) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam). A trial court clearly abuses its discretion if it reaches a decision so arbitrary and unreasonable as to amount to a clear and prejudicial error of law, or if it clearly fails to analyze the law correctly or apply the law correctly to the facts. In re RSR Corp., 475 S.W.3d 775, 778 (Tex. 2015); In re Cerberus Capital Mgmt., L.P., 164 S.W.3d at 382. In reviewing the trial court’s decision in a mandamus proceeding, this Court may not make factual determinations. In re RSR Corp., 475 S.W.3d at 778. Nor may we set aside the trial court’s finding unless it is clear from the record that the trial court could only reach one decision. In re Nitla S.A. de C.V., 92 S.W.3d at 422. Based on the record before us, we conclude relators have not shown they are entitled to the relief requested. Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a) (the court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief sought). /David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE 171389F.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.
