In re Sie Joe Lann--Appeal from 81st Judicial District Court of La Salle County

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
i i i i i i MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-08-00726-CV IN RE Sie Joe LANN Original Mandamus Proceeding1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice Delivered and Filed: December 10, 2008 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED On September 25, 2008, relator Sie Joe Lann filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining that the trial court dismissed or abandoned trial court Cause No. 00-09-00014-TXL.2 In 2001, the trial court rendered judgment against relator for $3,782.36 for delinquent property taxes to be satisfied by a foreclosure lien. Relator appealed and on January 23, 2003 this court reversed the judgment against relator and remanded the case back to the trial court in Sie Joe Lann v. La Salle County et al., No. 04-02-00005-CV, 2003 WL 141040 (Tex. App. San Antonio January 22, 2003, 1 ¦ T his proceeding arises out of Cause No. 02-03-00010-CVL, styled Sie Joe Lann v. Sharon Trigo, in the 218th Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas, the Honorable Stella H. Saxon presiding, and Cause No. 00-0900014-TXL, styled La Salle County, et al. v. Sie Joe Lann, et al., in the 218th Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas, the Honorable Stella H. Saxon presiding; however, the order complained of that was the subject of the appeal in Cause No. 04-02-00005-CV was signed by the Honorable Olin B. Strauss. 2 ¦ Relator initially complained the trial court also dismissed or abandoned Cause No. 02-03-00010, but now concedes that the case was dismissed following a final summary judgment and is no longer before the trial court. 04-08-00726-CV no pet.) (mem. op.). The case is currently active on the trial court s docket. There being no trial court action or inaction complained of, relator has not shown himself entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. PER CURIAM -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.