Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
in Re William Patrick Alexander
Citation: Not availableDocket: 10-14-00088-CV
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; April 17, 2014; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
William Patrick Alexander seeks mandamus relief against Judge Phillip Vick of Coryell County, asserting that Judge Vick has failed to rule on his pending motions within a reasonable time. Alexander claims that after a hearing where a summary judgment was granted against him for not exhausting administrative remedies, the judge did not address his outstanding motions in subsequent hearings. To obtain mandamus relief, a relator must prove: 1) the motion was properly filed and pending for a reasonable time; 2) a request for a ruling was made; and 3) the trial court refused to rule. It is noted that merely filing a motion does not constitute a request for a ruling. Alexander's burden includes providing a record showing his motion has been pending for an unreasonable duration. Although he filed a request for a ruling on March 4, 2014, he has not demonstrated that his motion has been unreasonably delayed. Consequently, the petition for writ of mandamus against Judge Vick is denied. Additionally, Alexander attempts to seek mandamus relief against the district clerk, alleging failures in filing motions, recording docket entries, and providing access to information. However, the court of appeals lacks jurisdiction to issue a writ against a district clerk, except to protect or enforce its jurisdiction, leading to the dismissal of this aspect of his petition for lack of jurisdiction. The opinion was delivered and filed on April 17, 2014, by Justice Al Scoggins, with Chief Justice Gray and Justice Davis concurring.