IN RE: Ashley Leeann Garcia a/k/a Ashley Leeann Hardin (2014)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Ashley Leeann Garcia a/k/a Ashley Leeann Hardin, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on November 19, 2014 through which she sought to compel the trial court to vacate all orders providing for legal custody, physical custody, or visitation with respect to A.L.G., a minor child.   The Court requested and received a response to the petition for writ of mandamus from the real party in interest, Patrick Robert Garcia, and further received a reply thereto from relator.

To be entitled to the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus, the relator must show that the trial court abused its discretion and that there is no adequate remedy by appeal.  In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex.2004) (orig.proceeding).  The relator has the burden of establishing both prerequisites to mandamus relief, and this burden is a heavy one.  In re CSX Corp., 124 S.W.3d 149, 151 (Tex.2003) (orig.proceeding).  “A trial court has no discretion in applying the law to the facts or determining what the law is.”  In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d at 135.   We assess the adequacy of an appellate remedy by balancing the benefits of mandamus review against the detriments.  In re State, 355 S.W.3d 611, 614–15 (Tex.2011) (orig.proceeding);  In re Team Rocket, L.P., 256 S.W.3d 257, 262 (Tex.2008) (orig.proceeding).  In performing this balancing, we look at a number of factors, including whether mandamus review “will spare litigants and the public ‘the time and money utterly wasted enduring eventual reversal of improperly conducted proceedings.’ ”  In re State, 355 S.W.3d at 615 (quoting In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d at 136).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, the response, the reply, and the applicable law, is of the opinion that relator has not met her burden to obtain mandamus relief.   Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED.   See id. 52.8(a).

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam 1 FN1. See Tex.R.App. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so.”);  Tex.R.App. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).