NUMBER 13-16-00561-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
IN RE ANDRINA DE ANDA
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam1
Relator Andrina De Anda filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause
seeking to enforce a forum selection clause contained in an attorney-client agreement
that she entered with real parties in interest, Jason C. Webster, P.C. d/b/a The Webster
Law Firm and Jason C. Webster. This Court requested and received a response from
the real parties in interest and further received a reply thereto from relator. The real
1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in
any other case,” but when “denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do
so.”); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).
parties in interest have now informed this Court that they have filed a notice of nonsuit in
the case underlying this original proceeding, thereby rendering this current petition for writ
of mandamus moot.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus,
the response, the reply, and the nonsuit, is of the opinion that this matter has been
rendered moot. See In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005)
(orig. proceeding) (“A case becomes moot if a controversy ceases to exist between the
parties at any stage of the legal proceedings . . .”); State Bar of Tex. v. Gomez, 891
S.W.2d 243, 245 (Tex. 1994) (stating that, for a controversy to be justiciable, there must
be a real controversy between the parties that will be actually resolved by the judicial
relief sought). Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the petition for writ of mandamus as
moot. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
13th day of January, 2017.
2