Summary
The Eighth District Court of Appeals of Texas denied a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the trial court to grant a motion to disqualify opposing counsel. The court held that the relators failed to show that the trial judge clearly abused her discretion by denying the disqualification motion.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court clearly abused its discretion by denying relators' motion to disqualify counsel.
- Whether relators had an adequate remedy by appeal so as to preclude mandamus relief.
Holdings
- A relator seeking mandamus relief must show both that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that the relator lacks an adequate remedy by appeal.
- Although an order granting or denying a motion to disqualify counsel is generally reviewable by mandamus, relators were not entitled to relief because they failed to show that the trial judge clearly abused her discretion in denying the motion.
Key quotations
“To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator generally must meet two requirements. First, the relator must show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion. Second, the relator must demonstrate that there is no adequate remedy by appeal.”
Factual background
Kenneth H. Archibald and Archibald & Associates, Inc. sought to disqualify counsel representing Brett Henderson, M.D., and El Paso Orthopedic Surgery Group. The trial court denied the motion. Relators petitioned for mandamus relief, asserting that the trial court should have granted the disqualification motion.
Procedural history
Relators filed a mandamus petition challenging the Honorable Linda Y. Chew's denial of their motion to disqualify counsel in the 327th District Court of El Paso County. The Court of Appeals denied mandamus relief.