Opinion issued May 19, 2011.
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-11-00003-CV
———————————
IN RE Jerry Simmons, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
By petition for writ of mandamus, relator, Jerry Simmons, complains that he has not been provided a copy of the final divorce decree in the underlying case.[1]
Relator’s petition names the Honorable Loren Jackson, former Harris County District Clerk, as respondent in this mandamus proceeding. The Honorable Chris Daniel is now the Harris County District Clerk. “When a public officer is a party in an official capacity to an appeal or original proceeding, and if that person ceases to hold office before the appeal or original proceeding is finally disposed of, the public officer’s successor is automatically substituted as a party if appropriate.” Tex. R. App. P. 7.2(a). Thus, we substitute Chris Daniel for Loren Jackson as respondent. Id.
We acknowledge that, pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 7.2(b), this Court should abate an original proceeding in which one public officer is substituted for another as a party in order to “allow the successor to reconsider the original party’s decision.” Tex. R. App. P. 7.2(b). But we conclude that abatement is not required here. Relator’s petition will not support mandamus relief against any respondent because it does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.5(a) (requiring relator to serve copy of petition on all parties to proceeding); Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a) (requiring relator to file certified or sworn copy of documents material to claim for relief).
Even had relator properly filed his petition, this Court could not grant the relief relator seeks. Our mandamus jurisdiction is governed by the Texas Government Code. Section 22.221 expressly limits the mandamus jurisdiction of the courts of appeals to (1) writs necessary to enforce the jurisdiction of the court of appeals and (2) writs against specified district or county court judges in the court of appeals district. Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §§ 22.221(a)–(b) (Vernon 2004).
We have no jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk unless necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See id. § 22.221(a); see also In re Washington, 7 S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding) (“We have no jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk unless such is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction.”). Relator’s petition does not raise an issue regarding the need to protect, or a threat to, our jurisdiction.
Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Sharp, and Massengale.
[1] The underlying case is Jerry Simmons v. Velda Rogers, No. 2010-22507, in the 308th District Court of Harris County, Texas.