In Re: Hamid Kashani, DDS, et al Appeal from 162nd Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Denied and Opinion Filed December 11, 2019 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-01199-CV IN RE HAMID KASHANI, DDS, ET AL, Relators Original Proceeding from the 162nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-13028 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Whitehill, Partida-Kipness, and Pedersen Opinion by Justice Pedersen Before the Court is Relators’ petition for writ of mandamus regarding a) respondent’s denial of pleas to the jurisdiction and motions to disqualify the plaintiff as relator in this qui tam lawsuit; and b) respondent’s order compelling production of 60 patient files from each of the five defendant groups. Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relators to 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). After reviewing the petition and the mandamus record, we conclude relators have not shown they are entitled to the relief requested. After reviewing the petition, the mandamus record, the response, reply, sur-reply, and the brief filed by the state, 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). BILL PEDERSEN. III JUSTICE
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.
