IN RE: Christopher Cedar (2016)

Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (1st Dist.).

IN RE: Christopher Cedar, in His Capacity as Attorney-in-fact for Susan Helen Cedar, Relator

NO. 01–16–00305–CV

Decided: April 28, 2016

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes and Higley.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Christopher Cedar, in his capacity as attorney-in-fact for Susan Helen Cedar, has filed this petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the trial court's March 30, 2016 order denying his Emergency Motion for Costs and awarding attorney's fees in the amount of $3,210.

Because relator has an adequate remedy by appeal, we deny the petition for mandamus and relator's accompanying Motion for Emergency Stay. See Tex.R. Civ. P. 215.2(b)(8); Braden v. Downey, 811 S.W.2d 922, 928–29 (Tex.1991); In re Noble Drilling, 449 S.W.3d 625, 632 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, orig. proceeding) (holding that party had adequate remedy by appeal from the trial court's award of $50,498 in sanctions); In re Supportkids, Inc., 124 S.W.3d 804, 808 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, orig. proceeding) (holding that party had adequate remedy by appeal from trial court's award of $10,000 in attorney's fees).

PER CURIAM

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network