Background
A discovery dispute arose over Natashia Griffith’s request to inspect UT Health Jacksonville Hospital’s electronic records and audit trails associated with Cynara Griffith. The trial court compelled the inspection, later enforced that order, and extended the inspection deadline.
On September 24, 2026, the trial court ordered that the inspection be video recorded and that a post-inspection audit trail be created. UT Health filed a mandamus petition challenging the required inspection as unnecessary and intrusive, along with a motion for an emergency stay. After two justices of the Twelfth Court of Appeals recused themselves, the Texas Supreme Court transferred the proceeding to the Sixth Court of Appeals.
The Court’s Holding
The court dismissed UT Health’s mandamus petition as moot. Griffith confirmed that the records inspection had been completed on September 28, 2026, the same day UT Health filed its petition.
Because the challenged inspection had already occurred, the court did not address the merits of UT Health’s objections to the trial court’s discovery orders. It also denied UT Health’s emergency-stay motion as moot.
Key Takeaways
- A mandamus petition challenging a compelled inspection may become moot once the inspection has been completed.
- The court did not decide whether the video-recording and post-inspection audit-trail requirements were proper.
- The dismissal of the mandamus petition also rendered the requested emergency stay moot.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the timing risks involved in seeking mandamus relief from a discovery order. If the disputed discovery occurs before an appellate court can act, the requested relief may no longer present a live controversy.
The opinion resolves only mootness and does not establish whether the trial court’s inspection requirements were permissible.