In re The HouReal Corporation Appeal from 270th District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued August 4, 2020 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-20-00056-CV ——————————— IN RE THE HOUREAL CORPORATION, Relator Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, The HouReal Corporation, has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s order denying its motion to compel discovery regarding real party in interest, Rescue Concept, Inc.’s efforts to sell a parcel of land to a third party. We deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.1 Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that is only available in limited circumstances. See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839–40 (Tex. 1992). Discovery matters are generally within the trial court’s sound discretion, but “mandamus will issue to correct a discovery order if the order constitutes a clear abuse of discretion and there is no adequate remedy by appeal.” See In re Colonial Pipeline Co., 968 S.W.2d 938, 941 (Tex. 1998). “[A] clear failure by the trial court to analyze or apply the law correctly will constitute an abuse of discretion.” Walker, 827 S.W.3d at 840. Relator has not demonstrated that the trial court committed an abuse of discretion in denying its motion to compel discovery. See id. at 839 (trial court abuses its discretion where “it reaches a decision so arbitrary and unreasonable as to amount to a clear and prejudicial error of law”). Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a), (d). All pending motions are dismissed as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Kelly, and Landau 1 The underlying case is The HouReal Corporation v. Rescue Concepts, Inc., Cause No. 2014-71749, in the 270th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Dedra Davis presiding. 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.