Denied and Opinion Filed July 20, 2021
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-21-00570-CV
IN RE ERIC DRAKE, Relator
Original Proceeding from the 162nd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-13508
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Reichek
Opinion by Justice Molberg
In his July 14, 2021 petition for writ of mandamus, writ of prohibition, and
emergency relief, relator is a vexatious litigant challenging various issues related to
the local administrative judge’s denial of his request for permission to file litigation.
Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court clearly
abused its discretion and that he lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential
Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Further, a writ of
prohibition is a limited purpose remedy used to enable an appellate court to protect
and enforce its jurisdiction and judgments. Holloway v. Fifth Court of Appeals, 767
S.W.2d 680, 683 (Tex. 1989) (orig. proceeding); In re Herrera, No. 05-14-00394-
CV, 2014 WL 1477922, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas April 14, 2014, orig. proceeding)
(mem. op.).
Based on our review of the petition and record, we conclude that relator has
failed to show his entitlement to the relief requested. We also conclude that this case
does not fall within this Court’s limited jurisdiction to issue a writ of prohibition.
Accordingly, we deny the petition to the extent it seeks a writ of mandamus, and we
dismiss the petition to the extent it seeks a writ of prohibition. Having denied the
petition, we also deny the request for emergency relief as moot.
/Ken Molberg//
210570f.p05 KEN MOLBERG
JUSTICE
–2–
in Re: Eric Drake
Combined Opinion