Summary
The Thirteenth Court of Appeals of Texas denied Antonio G. Cantu’s pro se petition for writ of mandamus, supplemental petition, and second supplemental petition. The court held that Cantu had not met his burden to establish a clear abuse of discretion by the trial court and the absence of an adequate remedy by appeal.
Holdings
- Cantu was not entitled to mandamus relief because he failed to establish the requirements for mandamus: a clear abuse of discretion and the absence of an adequate remedy by appeal.
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court clearly abused its discretion by ordering Cantu to remove allegations describing criminal conduct from his pleadings and striking the pleadings for failure to comply.
- Whether Cantu lacked an adequate remedy by appeal so as to qualify for mandamus relief.
Disposition
writ_denied
Cases Cited (8)
- In re Ill. Nat’l Ins., 685 S.W.3d 826, 834 (Tex. 2024) (orig. proceeding)(followed)
- In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36, 138 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding)(followed)
- Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839–40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding)(followed)
- In re Dallas HERO, 698 S.W.3d 242, 247 (Tex. 2024) (orig. proceeding)(followed)
- In re H.E.B. Grocery Co., 492 S.W.3d 300, 302 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam)(followed)
- Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding) (per curiam)(followed)
- In re Cantu, No. 13-26-00336-CV, 2026 WL _____, at *_ (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Apr. __, 2026, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)(related proceeding)
- In re Cantu, No. 13-26-00338-CV, 2026 WL _____, at *_ (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Apr. __, 2026, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)(related proceeding)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…