IN RE: JANINE CHARBONEAU (2018)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this original proceeding, relator seeks a writ of mandamus ordering the trial court to grant relator's Rule 736 motion to dismiss and vacate any orders the trial court issued in the underlying proceeding. We deny the relief requested.

To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). It is relator's burden to provide the court with a record sufficient to establish her right to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k), 52.7(a). Rules 52.3 and 52.7 require the relator to provide “a certified or sworn copy” of certain documents, including any order complained of, any other document showing the matter complained of, and every document that is material to the relator's claim for relief that was filed in any underlying proceeding. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1). Rule 52.3 also requires the relator to certify that she has reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by competent evidence in the appendix or record. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j).

Relator's petition for writ of mandamus is not certified as required by rule 52.3(j) and does not include the required appendix and record. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j), 52.3(k)(1)(a), 52.7(a). Based on the record before us, we conclude relator has not shown she is entitled to the relief requested. Accordingly, we deny relator's petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a) (the court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief sought).

MOLLY FRANCIS JUSTICE