In re Terr'l La'yonne Mark Appeal from 505th District Court of Fort Bend County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued December 15, 2016 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-15-00582-CV ——————————— IN RE TERR’L LA’YONNE MARK, Relator Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, Terr’l La’Yonne Mark, filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the original respondent, the Honorable Brenda Mullinix, to rule on his pending motion to transfer venue without a hearing of the underlying suit affecting the parent-child relationship from Fort Bend to Tarrant County.1 This Court had 1 The underlying case is In the Interest of [T.M.], a Minor Child, Cause No. 14-DCV214998, pending in the 505th District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas, the Honorable David S. Perwin presiding. abated this original proceeding and lifted this Court’s prior stay to allow the new respondent, the Honorable David S. Perwin, to rule on relator’s pending motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 7.2(b). On December 2, 2016, relator filed a “Notice of Nonsuit” in this Court, which we construe as a motion to dismiss. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). Relator explains that the parties have settled the transfer issue in the trial court, the sole subject of this petition, which renders this case moot. Although there is no certificate of conference with relator’s motion, it contains a certificate of service on counsel for the real parties in interest and has been on file with this Court for more than ten days with no response. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a)(2). Accordingly, we withdraw the abatement order, issued on November 8, 2016, reinstate this case, construe relator’s notice of nonsuit as a motion to dismiss, grant the motion, and dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Lloyd. 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.
