IN RE: ALLSTATE COUNTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND DAVID GONZALEZ--Appeal from County Court at Law No 6 of Hidalgo County
Annotate this CaseNUMBER 13-06-458-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
IN RE: ALLSTATE COUNTY MUTUAL
INSURANCE COMPANY AND DAVID GONZALEZ
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus and
Motion for Emergency Temporary Relief
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Ya ez, Rodriguez, and Garza
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
On August 18, 2006, relators, Allstate County Mutual Insurance Company and David Gonzalez, filed a petition for writ of mandamus with this Court in which they allege that on July 19, 2006, the respondent, the Honorable Arnoldo Cantu, Jr., Presiding Judge of the County Court at Law No. 5, of Hidalgo County, Texas, abused his discretion by entering an order granting plaintiffs motion to compel responses to plaintiffs interrogatories, requests for admission and requests for production.
Relators petition for writ of mandamus asks this Court to order the respondent to issue an order denying plaintiffs motion to compel, or in the alternative, to reconsider his ruling. In addition, relators filed an emergency motion for stay, asking this Court to order a stay of the trial court s order granting plaintiffs motion to compel responses to plaintiffs interrogatories, requests for admission and requests for production.
This Court stayed the trial court s order in the underlying action and requested a response from the real parties in interest, Jorge Manllo Karim and Teresita S. De Manllo.
Having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, the real parties in interest s response, the relators reply to response, and the real parties in interest s surreply, this Court is of the opinion that relators have not shown themselves entitled to the relief sought and the petition for writ of mandamus should be denied.
Accordingly, this Court denies the petition and lifts the stay granted on relators emergency motion. The petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM
Memorandum Opinion delivered and
filed this the 28th day of September, 2006.
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.