In re Leroy Stroman Appeal from Probate Court No 1 of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Opinion filed September 20, 2016. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-16-00662-CV IN RE LEROY STROMAN, Relator ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS Probate Court No. 1 Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 410,300 MEMORANDUM OPINION On August 23, 2016, relator Leroy Stroman filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the Honorable Loyd Wright, presiding judge of the Probate Court No. 1 of Harris County, to: (1) vacate the Order dated July 6, 2016 that grants an offset of $12,487.19 to Robert R. Tautenhahn, Independent Executor of the Estate of Robert L. Wright, Deceased (Tautenhahn) for the payment of ad valorem property taxes; (2) reverse any order, judgment, or any portion thereof determining that relator is liable for or subject to any debts, taxes or encumbrances on the property prior to the execution of a Special Warranty Deed transferring the property at 105 Sweeny Street; (3) find that the supersedeas order dated July 18, 2014 is void; (4) order Tautenhahn to pay attorney’s fees in the amount of $57,179.15 plus 5% interest from the date of rendition of judgment until the date paid in full; (5) award relator all attorney’s fees for all work since rendition of judgment, including any fees incurred in the preparation of his petition for writ of mandamus; (6) modify the Special Warranty Deed to remove any release language contained therein; (7) order that the remaining attorney’s fees be paid in this cause within ten days; and (8) order execution of the amended judgment. To obtain mandamus relief, a relator generally must show both that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate remedy by appeal. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Relator has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. Relator’s motion for leave to file his petition is denied as moot because such motion is no longer required under the Rules of Appellate Procedure. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Christopher. 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.
