IN RE: APOLONIO VILLARREAL--Appeal from of County

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NUMBER 13-11-00221-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG IN RE APOLONIO VILLARREAL On Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Motion for Emergency Stay. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion1 Relator, Apolonio Villarreal, filed a petition for writ of mandamus and a motion for emergency stay in the above cause on April 12, 2011. Through this original proceeding, relator seeks to set aside various rulings issued by an administrative law judge in docket number 454-10-0970.C, currently pending in the State Office of Administrative Hearings. 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) ( When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so. ); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). This Court's original jurisdiction is governed by section 22.221 of the Texas Government Code. See TEX. GOV T CODE ANN. § 22.221 (Vernon 2004). Section 22.221(b) expressly limits the mandamus jurisdiction of the courts of appeals to writs of mandamus issued against a judge of a district or county court in the court of appeals district or against a judge of a district court who is acting as a magistrate at a court of inquiry . . . in the court of appeals district. See id. § 22.221(b). The Court may also issue all other writs necessary to enforce the jurisdiction of the court. See id. § 22.221(a); In re Richardson, 327 S.W.3d 848, 851 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 2010, orig. proceeding); In re Phillips, 296 S.W.3d 682, 684 (Tex. App. El Paso 2009, orig. proceeding). The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency stay, is of the opinion that we lack jurisdiction over this matter. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency stay are DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a), (d). PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 12th day of April, 2011. 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.