Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 4, 2010.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-10-00356-CV
In Re Danny Lee Gonzales, Relator
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
WRIT OF MANDAMUS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On April 21, 2010, relator, Danny Lee Gonzales, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (Vernon 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In his petition, relator states he filed an “Original Petition For Divorce and was placed in the 309th Judicial District Court, Judge Frank Ryand [sic] presiding.” Relator alleges Loren Jackson, Harris County District Clerk, “notified [relator] of a change of venue but did not notify [relator] of the new courtroom number.” Relator complains that he has been denied access to the courts and his case is in jeopardy of being dismissed for want of prosecution. Relator requests that we compel Jackson to respond to his filings and requests for information concerning his “courtroom number and Judges [sic] name after the said change of venue.”
A court of appeals has no general writ power over a person—other than a judge of a district or county court—unless issuance of the writ is necessary to enforce the court’s jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221. A court of appeals has no jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk unless necessary to enforce its jurisdiction. In re Washington, 7 S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding). Relator has not shown that a writ of mandamus directed to the district clerk is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against the district clerk.
Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Brown, Sullivan, and Christopher.