In re Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC Appeal from 157th 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 10, 2019. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-19-00625-CV IN RE WAL-MART STORES TEXAS, LLC, Relator ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 157th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2018-05210 MEMORANDUM OPINION On August 14, 2019, relator Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC (“Walmart”) filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (Supp.); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. The real party-in-interest is Betsy Blount. In the petition, Walmart asks this court to compel the Honorable Tayna Garrison, presiding judge of the 157th District Court of Harris County, to vacate the part of her June 26, 2019 order, which grants Blount’s motion to compel and overrules Walmart’s objections to Fourth Request for Production No. 1. Relator’s motion for leave to supplement the mandamus record is granted. See In re Thetford, 574 S.W.3d 362, 365 (Tex. 2019) (orig. proceeding). 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 the relator has no adequate remedy at law, such as an appeal. In re Garza, 544 S.W.3d 836, 840 (Tex. 2018) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Because Walmart has not shown it is entitled to mandamus relief, we deny its petition for writ of mandamus. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Spain, and Poissant. 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.
