Opinion issued March 5, 2019
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-18-00251-CV
———————————
IN RE NEPHROLOGY LEADERS AND ASSOCIATES, PLLC AND M.
ATIQ DADA, MD, Relators
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relators, Nephrology Leaders and Associates, PLLC and M. Atiq Dada, MD,
filed a petition for writ of mandamus.1 Relators sought to vacate the Honorable
1
The underlying proceeding is Nephrology Leaders and Associates, PLLC and M.
Atiq Dada, MD v. McGuireWoods LLP, Cause No. 2017-21479, in the 190th District
Court, Harris County, the Honorable Beau Miller presiding. Relators’ prior
interlocutory appeal challenging a March 13, 2018 sealing order for non-party
American Renal Associates is pending under 01-18-00242-CV.
Debra Ibarra Mayfield’s March 13, 2018 “Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to
Compel” and to direct the respondent to order the privileges asserted by real party
in interest McGuireWoods LLP waived or, alternatively, an order requiring
McGuireWoods LLP to produce a privilege log. After abating this case, a
supplemental clerk’s record was filed attaching a January 29, 2019 order, signed by
the new respondent, the Honorable Beau Miller, vacating the March 13, 2018 Order
and the related November 27, 2018 order denying relators’ motion for
reconsideration. See TEX. R. APP. P. 7.2(b). Then on February 26, 2019, a
supplemental clerk’s record was filed attaching the February 13, 2019 amended
order granting relators’ alternative motion to compel an amended privilege log from
McGuireWoods LLP.
The Clerk of this Court’s February 21, 2019 notice of intent to dismiss for
want of jurisdiction notified relators that this mandamus petition may be dismissed
for want of jurisdiction as moot unless they responded within ten days of that notice.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a); see, e.g., In re Jackson, No. 01–12–00020–CV, 2012
WL 405707, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 9, 2012, orig. proceeding)
(mem. op.) (dismissing mandamus petition as moot after relator received relief
requested). On February 25, 2019, relators filed a letter in response agreeing with
the Clerk’s notice and consenting to the dismissal of its petition for want of
jurisdiction as moot.
2
Accordingly, the Court reinstates this case, construes relators’ letter as a
motion to dismiss, grants it, and dismisses this petition for want of jurisdiction as
moot. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Landau.
3