IN RE: TRACEY W. MURPHY AND MATTHEW D. WHITMIRE--Appeal from 81st District Court of Karnes County

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-08-00615-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG IN RE TRACEY W. MURPHY AND MATTHEW D. WHITMIRE On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Yañez, Garza, and Vela Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion1 Relators, Tracey W. Murphy and Matthew D. Whitmire, filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on November 3, 2008, seeking to compel the District Clerk of Karnes County to file their pleadings. We do not have jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. This Court does not have mandamus jurisdiction over district clerks unless it is shown that issuance of the writ is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See TEX . GOV'T CODE ANN . § 22.221(a), (b) (Vernon 2004); In re Washington, 7 S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. 1 See T EX . R . A PP . P . 5 2 .8 (d ) ( W hen denying relief, the court m ay hand dow n an opinio n but is not required to do so. ); T EX . R . A PP . P . 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and m em orandum opinions). proceeding); In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App. San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding); see also In re Nubine, No. 13-08-507-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 6534, at *1 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi Aug. 27, 2008, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op). Moreover, we do not have mandamus jurisdiction over cases that do not arise from our court of appeals district. Karnes County is in the Fourth Court of Appeals District rather than the Thirteenth Court of Appeals District. See TEX . GOV'T CODE ANN . § 22.201 (e), (n) (Vernon 2004). The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, is of the opinion that we lack jurisdiction to consider this matter. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. See TEX . R. APP. P. 52.8(a). PER CURIAM Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this 7th day of November, 2008. 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.