Background
Priscilla Franks, proceeding without counsel, sought a writ of mandamus in connection with her lawsuit against Darrell Mayfield and JDWM Enterprises, LLC, pending in Harris County Civil Court at Law No. 4 before Judge Manpreet Monica Singh.
Franks requested an immediate stay of a trial scheduled for September 18, 2026, alleging that material discovery and witness-disclosure issues remained unresolved. She also filed an emergency motion under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.10 asking the appellate court to stay all proceedings in the trial court while it considered her mandamus petition.
The Court’s Holding
The Texas First Court of Appeals concluded that Franks failed to establish that she was entitled to mandamus relief. The court therefore denied her petition for a writ of mandamus.
The court also dismissed all pending motions, including Franks’s emergency motion for temporary relief and a stay, as moot. The memorandum opinion was issued per curiam by a panel consisting of Justices Rivas-Molloy, Guerra, and Gunn.
Key Takeaways
- The court denied Franks’s petition after concluding that she had not established entitlement to mandamus relief.
- Franks had sought to halt a September 18, 2026 trial because of allegedly unresolved discovery and witness-disclosure issues.
- The denial of the petition led the court to dismiss the emergency stay motion and all other pending motions as moot.
Why It Matters
The decision left the underlying trial-court proceedings unstayed. Because the brief memorandum opinion states only the court’s general conclusion that Franks failed to establish entitlement to mandamus relief, it does not provide additional reasoning about her discovery or witness-disclosure allegations.