IN RE NESTLE USA, INC.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO . 12-0518 444444444444 IN RE NESTLE USA, INC., RELATOR 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 JUSTICE WILLETT , joined by JUSTICE LEHRMANN , dissenting. For the reasons explained in my separate writing in In re Allcat Claims Service, L.P.,1 I believe the Court lacks exclusive original mandamus jurisdiction in taxpayers constitutional challenges like this. In my view, the Court has stretched our mandamus jurisprudence beyond its constitutional and prudential limits. I would reaffirm those purposeful curbs on judicial power, not redefine them. Mandamus is not a jurisdictional talisman to conjure instant Supreme Court review. As a constitutional matter, we cannot exercise original jurisdiction that the Constitution does not permit; as a statutory matter, the Tax Code disallows taxpayer suits like this; and as a prudential matter, deciding whether a statute is constitutional is simply not the stuff of mandamus. All in all, because I believe the Court has disregarded settled doctrines to remake the mandamus remedy into something more ordinary than extraordinary, I respectfully dissent. 1 356 S.W .3d 455, 474 93 (Tex. 2011). _______________________________________ Don R. Willett Justice OPINION DELIVERED: October 19, 2012 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.
