Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Cube HHF Limited Partnership sought mandamus relief from an order denying its motion to disqualify opposing counsel. The petition arose from Steven Lewis, Sr. v. CubeSmart, L.P., CubeSmart Asset Management, LLC, and Cube HHF Limited Partnership, pending in the 189th District Court of Harris County.
The challenged order was entered by Judge Tamika Craft-Demming. The appellate court’s memorandum opinion does not describe the asserted basis for disqualification or the trial court’s reasoning.
The Court’s Holding
The First Court of Appeals denied Cube HHF Limited Partnership’s petition for a writ of mandamus. The court concluded that the relator had not demonstrated entitlement to mandamus relief.
The per curiam opinion did not elaborate on the governing disqualification standards or explain which requirement for mandamus relief Cube HHF failed to establish. The court also dismissed all pending motions as moot.
Key Takeaways
- A party challenging the denial of a motion to disqualify opposing counsel must establish entitlement to mandamus relief.
- Cube HHF did not make the showing required to obtain that extraordinary remedy.
- The court denied the petition and dismissed all pending motions as moot.
Why It Matters
The decision leaves in place the trial court’s refusal to disqualify opposing counsel in the underlying Harris County litigation. Because the memorandum opinion provides no substantive analysis, it offers little additional guidance on attorney-disqualification standards beyond confirming that the relator bears the burden of establishing entitlement to mandamus relief.