Opinion
No. 05-19-01061-CV
10-29-2019
IN RE K&L AUTO CRUSHERS, LLC and Thomas Gothard, Jr., Relators
J. Martin Futrell, Amy K. Witherite, Eberstein & Witherite, L.L.P., 10440, N. Central Expy., Ste. 400, Dallas TX 75231-2228, Rosalyn R. Tippett, Tippett Law Office, 2450 Lakeside Parkway, Ste. 150 (PMBox 116), Flower Mound TX 75022, Kirk L. Pittard, Kelly, Durham & Pittard, LLP, PO Box 224626, Dallas TX 75222-4626, Morgan McPheeters, McPheeters Law, PLLC, 4447 N. Central Expy., Ste. 101, Box 158, Dallas TX 75205, Tammy Holt, Durham, Pittard & Spalding, LLP, PO Box 224626, Dallas TX 75222, Christopher M. McDowell, McDowell Law PLLC, P.O. Box 491, Coppell TX 75019, for Real parties in interest. Wade C. Crosnoe, Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, LLP, 701 Brazos St. Ste. 1500, Austin TX 78701-3293, Elizabeth Lee Thompson, Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, L.L.P., 700 North Pearl St., 25th FL, Dallas TX 75201, Weston L. Hall, William H. Chamblee, Chamblee Ryan, PC, 2777 N. Stemmons Fwy., Ste. 1157, Dallas TX 75207-2506, for Relator.
J. Martin Futrell, Amy K. Witherite, Eberstein & Witherite, L.L.P., 10440, N. Central Expy., Ste. 400, Dallas TX 75231-2228, Rosalyn R. Tippett, Tippett Law Office, 2450 Lakeside Parkway, Ste. 150 (PMBox 116), Flower Mound TX 75022, Kirk L. Pittard, Kelly, Durham & Pittard, LLP, PO Box 224626, Dallas TX 75222-4626, Morgan McPheeters, McPheeters Law, PLLC, 4447 N. Central Expy., Ste. 101, Box 158, Dallas TX 75205, Tammy Holt, Durham, Pittard & Spalding, LLP, PO Box 224626, Dallas TX 75222, Christopher M. McDowell, McDowell Law PLLC, P.O. Box 491, Coppell TX 75019, for Real parties in interest.
Wade C. Crosnoe, Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, LLP, 701 Brazos St. Ste. 1500, Austin TX 78701-3293, Elizabeth Lee Thompson, Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, L.L.P., 700 North Pearl St., 25th FL, Dallas TX 75201, Weston L. Hall, William H. Chamblee, Chamblee Ryan, PC, 2777 N. Stemmons Fwy., Ste. 1157, Dallas TX 75207-2506, for Relator.
Before Justices Whitehill, Partida-Kipness, and Pedersen, III
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Opinion by Justice Pedersen, III Before the Court is relators' petition for writ of mandamus in which they contend the trial court abused its discretion by denying their motion to compel production of documents and their motion for partial reconsideration regarding certain requests included in the motion to compel. Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relators to show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). After reviewing the petition and the mandamus record, we conclude relators have not shown they are entitled to the relief requested.
Accordingly, we deny relators' petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a) (the court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief sought).