Summary
The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, denied a petition for writ of mandamus seeking permission for the relator to appear in district court by video conference or other electronic means. The court held that the relator failed to provide a sufficient record to establish entitlement to extraordinary relief and dismissed as moot his motion for leave to file the petition.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Relator established entitlement to mandamus relief requiring the district court to permit his appearance by video conference or other electronic means.
- Whether Relator's failure to provide a sufficient record warranted denial of the mandamus petition.
Holdings
- Relator failed to establish entitlement to extraordinary mandamus relief because he did not provide a sufficient record from which the court could evaluate the merits of his claims.
Key quotations
“of every document that is material to [his] claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding”
Factual background
Relator sought to appear in the district court by video conference or another electronic method, stating that he is a U.S. citizen seeking asylum in Canada and had no other way to access the Texas courts. He did not provide the court of appeals with a sufficient record containing the materials necessary to evaluate the merits of his mandamus petition.
Procedural history
J. E. Pendleton filed an original petition for writ of mandamus in the Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, concerning access to the district court by electronic means. The court concluded that Relator had not provided a sufficient record to evaluate the merits of his claims and denied mandamus relief. A motion for leave to file the petition was dismissed as moot.