In Re Henek Fluid Purity Systems, Inc. and Brian Kamke Appeal from 133rd District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed October 9, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-18-00819-CV IN RE HENEK FLUID PURITY SYSTEMS, INC. AND BRIAN KAMKE, Relators ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 133rd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2017-39455 MEMORANDUM OPINION On September 18, 2018, relators Henek Fluid Purity Systems, Inc. and Brian Kamke filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West Supp. 2017); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relators ask this court to compel the Honorable Jaclanel McFarland, presiding judge of the 133rd District Court of Harris County, to vacate her August 29, 2018 order compelling arbitration. With certain exceptions not applicable here, to obtain mandamus relief, a relator 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). Relators have not shown that they do not have an adequate remedy by appeal after final judgment. See In re Gulf Exploration, LLC, 289 S.W.3d 836, 842–43 (Tex. 2009) (orig. proceeding); Kahn v. Baker Nissan N., Inc., No. 14-09-00106-CV, 2009 WL 1795580 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] June 25, 2009, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op.). Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Busby. 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.