in Re Schindler Elevator Corporation

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON ORDER Appellate case name: In re Schindler Elevator Corporation Appellate case number: 01-21-00177-CV Trial court case number: 2018-56368 Trial court: 129th District Court of Harris County On April 7, 2021, relator, Schindler Elevator Corporation, filed a petition for writ of mandamus, requesting that this Court direct the trial court to cancel an April 19, 2021 hearing in the trial court to consider the “Motion to Confirm Jurisdiction” filed by real parties in interest Manuel Zepeda and Pricilda Luzania, individually and on behalf of L.Z., D.Z., and E.Z., minor children (the “Plaintiffs”). In its mandamus petition, relator argued that the trial court lacked plenary power over the underlying proceeding. In connection with its petition for writ of mandamus, relator filed an “Emergency Motion for Temporary Relief,” requesting that we stay the April 19, 2021 hearing in which the trial court was to consider Plaintiffs’ Motion to Confirm Jurisdiction, pending resolution of the mandamus petition. On April 12, 2021, we entered an order denying relator’s emergency motion to stay, allowing the April 19, 2021 hearing to proceed. In our April 12, 2021 order, we further directed the parties to, within ten days of the April 19, 2021 hearing, provide the Court a status update regarding any ruling of the trial court. On April 29, 2021, the parties filed a joint status update representing that the trial court ruled that it “is going to confirm that it currently has jurisdiction over this case and the judgment is not final,” and further stayed the trial court proceedings for a period of sixty days, pending resolution of relator’s petition for writ of mandamus in this Court. The parties’ joint status update notes that because the trial court has ruled, “Schindler’s petition for [writ of] mandamus is now ripe for review by this Court.” However, the joint status update further notes that relator “wishes to amend its petition in light of the trial court’s order.” On April 30, 2021, relator filed an unopposed motion for leave to file an amended petition for writ of mandamus, requesting leave of the Court to amend its petition for writ of mandamus, with its amended petition to be filed on or before May 20, 2021. Relator’s motion includes a certificate of conference representing that real parties in interest are not opposed to the relief requested in relator’s motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a)(2). Accordingly, relator’s motion for leave to file an amended petition for writ of mandamus is granted. Any amended petition for writ of mandamus must be filed on or before May 20, 2021. We further request a response to relator’s amended petition for writ of mandamus from real parties in interest. The response(s), if any, is due to be filed with this Court no later than twenty days from the date relator files its amended petition for writ of mandamus. It is so ORDERED. Judge’s signature: ____/a/ Amparo Guerra________  Acting individually  Acting for the Court Date: __May 6, 2021____ 2