Denied and Opinion Filed February 20, 2015.
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-15-00200-CV
IN RE NATALIE ANNE HUNTING, Relator
Original Proceeding from the 303rd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DF-13-12245
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Lang-Miers, Evans, and Whitehill
Opinion by Justice Evans
Relator filed this petition for writ of mandamus requesting that the Court order the trial
court to vacate its temporary orders appointing the father of the child who is the subject of this
modification proceeding temporary sole managing conservator and direct the trial court to return
the child’s care to relator. Alternatively, relator requests that the Court order the trial court to
vacate its temporary orders and enter temporary orders providing for standard possession under
the family code. The relator’s petition does not comply with the rules of appellate procedure and
is incomplete. We deny the petition.
“Those seeking the extraordinary remedy of mandamus must follow the applicable
procedural rules. Chief among these is the critical obligation to provide the reviewing court with
a complete and adequate record.” In re Le, 335 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th
Dist.] 2011, orig. proceeding). Because the record in a mandamus proceeding is assembled by
the parties, see TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j), 52.3(k), 52.7, this Court strictly enforces the requirements
of rule 52 of the rules of appellate procedure to ensure the integrity of the mandamus record.
See, e.g., In re Butler, 270 S.W.3d 757, 759 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, orig. proceeding) (finding
affidavit insufficient to authenticate record because it did not state affiant had “personal
knowledge the copy of the order in the appendix is a correct copy of the original.”). Relator’s
petition for writ of mandamus does not include a certification that the person filing the petition
“has reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported
by competent evidence included in the appendix or record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j). It does not
include a sworn or certified copy of the order of which she complains, sworn or certified copies
of any documents material to the relator’s claim for relief filed in the underlying proceeding, or a
properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from the underlying proceeding.
TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A); 52.7.
Ordinarily, to obtain mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court has
clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential
Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Based on the record before us,
we conclude relator has failed to establish a right to relief. We DENY the petition.
/David Evans/
DAVID EVANS
150200F.P05 JUSTICE
–2–