In re Mary Richardson

Summary

The Texas Court of Appeals for the Second District conditionally granted Mary Richardson’s petition for writ of mandamus. The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by dismissing a claim that the appellate court had previously determined was supported by an adequate expert report, thereby failing to comply with the appellate mandate. The writ would issue only if the trial court failed to vacate the dismissal as to Richardson’s claim for prolonged pain and disability.

Holdings

1. The trial court abused its discretion by dismissing Richardson's claim for prolonged pain and disability because the dismissal failed to carry out the court of appeals' mandate affirming the denial of Foster's motion to dismiss as to that claim and interfered with the appellate court's prior judgment.
2. Richardson did not have an adequate remedy by law because she was not required to pursue a second interlocutory appeal to obtain relief already granted in the prior interlocutory appeal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by dismissing Richardson's claim for prolonged pain and disability despite the court of appeals' prior determination that her expert report was adequate as to that claim.
2. Whether Richardson had an adequate remedy by interlocutory appeal that precluded mandamus relief.

Disposition

writ_granted