IN RE: Julius Stewart (2012)

MEMORANDUM Opinion

The application (petition) for writ of mandamus is denied.¹

[OT06]

FOOTNOTES

FN1. The application has numerous procedural deficiencies.   It lacks all of the requirements of Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.3 and, other than citation references to judicial recusal and disqualification, fails to inform the Court of the nature of the proceeding and the identity of the parties.   See Tex.R.App. P. 52.3.   It lacks a record.   See id. 52.3(k), 52.7(a).   It lacks proof of service on the Respondent(s) and the Real–Party–in–Interest, and it is not signed by the relator.   See id. 9.1, 9.5, 52.2.   Because of our disposition and to expedite it, we will implement Rule 2 and suspend these rules.   Id. 2..  FN1. The application has numerous procedural deficiencies.   It lacks all of the requirements of Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.3 and, other than citation references to judicial recusal and disqualification, fails to inform the Court of the nature of the proceeding and the identity of the parties.   See Tex.R.App. P. 52.3.   It lacks a record.   See id. 52.3(k), 52.7(a).   It lacks proof of service on the Respondent(s) and the Real–Party–in–Interest, and it is not signed by the relator.   See id. 9.1, 9.5, 52.2.   Because of our disposition and to expedite it, we will implement Rule 2 and suspend these rules.   Id. 2.

REX D. DAVIS Justice