Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Relator Wonisha Tatum filed an original proceeding on a petition for writ of mandamus. The purpose of this petition was to challenge a contempt order issued by a trial court. Tatum specifically contended that the trial court’s contempt order was void.
The underlying case associated with this mandamus petition is identified as Wonisha Tatum v. Daphne Noble, cause number 2024-52922. This case is currently pending in the 280th District Court of Harris County, Texas, with the Honorable Damiane Dianne Curvey presiding.
The Court’s Holding
The First District Court of Texas, in a per curiam memorandum opinion, denied the mandamus relief sought by Relator Wonisha Tatum. The court found no basis to grant the petition challenging the trial court’s contempt order as void.
In its decision, the appellate court referenced Rule 52.8(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Following the denial of mandamus relief, the court also dismissed any pending motions in the case as moot.
Key Takeaways
- The Texas First District Court of Appeals denied a petition for writ of mandamus.
- The petition challenged a trial court’s contempt order, arguing it was void.
- The opinion was issued per curiam by a panel of Justices Guerra, Gunn, and Morgan.
- The court cited TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a) in its denial.
Why It Matters
This case illustrates the high bar for obtaining mandamus relief in Texas appellate courts, particularly when challenging a trial court’s order for contempt. Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, typically reserved for situations where a trial court has abused its discretion or violated a legal duty and there is no adequate remedy by appeal.
The per curiam nature of the opinion, which usually indicates the court views the issues as straightforward or clearly controlled by existing law, suggests that the arguments presented by Tatum regarding the voidness of the contempt order did not meet the stringent requirements for mandamus intervention.