Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Greenwich LifeSciences, Inc. sought mandamus relief from two orders entered in Chris Lentz v. Greenwich LifeSciences, Inc., pending in the 113th District Court of Harris County. The challenged orders denied the company’s motion to dismiss for improper venue and its subsequent motion for reconsideration.
Greenwich also filed an emergency motion asking the court of appeals to stay all trial-court proceedings while its mandamus petition was under review. It argued that, without a stay, it would have to prepare for and proceed to a trial scheduled for November 2, 2026. Lentz opposed the requested stay.
The Court’s Holding
In a per curiam memorandum opinion, the First Court of Appeals concluded that Greenwich had failed to establish entitlement to mandamus relief. The court therefore denied the petition.
The opinion did not provide additional analysis of the venue dispute or identify which element required for mandamus relief Greenwich failed to prove. Because the petition was denied, the court dismissed all pending motions, including the emergency motion for temporary relief, as moot.
Key Takeaways
- The court declined to disturb the trial court’s orders denying Greenwich’s improper-venue motion and motion for reconsideration.
- The mandamus petition failed because Greenwich did not establish that it was entitled to the extraordinary remedy.
- Denial of the petition rendered Greenwich’s request to stay the trial-court proceedings moot.
Why It Matters
The decision leaves the underlying Harris County case on its existing course, including the challenged venue rulings. Greenwich received neither mandamus relief nor a stay of the trial-court proceedings.
Because the memorandum opinion states only its conclusion and offers no substantive venue analysis, its significance is primarily procedural rather than precedential guidance on Texas venue law.