Legal Opinion
Karlock v. Schattman
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided March 3, 1995No. 2-94-194-CVPublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DAY, Justice.
In this mandamus proceeding, relators Kendra Karlock, James C. Baker, Pulley, Roberts, Cunningham & Stripling, L.L.P., and Diane Klepin allege that respondent, Judge Michael D. Schattman, abused his discretion in finding violations of rule 18 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and entering sanctions against them. Although we find respondent abused his discretion, relators have an adequate remedy by appeal and therefore mandamus relief would be inappropriate. Accordingly, relators’ petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
The Underlying Suit
The underlying suit was brought…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Walker v. PackerTexas Supreme Court · 1992
- Johnson v. Fourth Court of AppealsTexas Supreme Court · 1985
- Canadian Helicopters Ltd. v. WittigTexas Supreme Court · 1994
- GTE Communications Systems Corp. v. TannerTexas Supreme Court · 1993
- United States v. KozminskiSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- R.M. Dudley Construction Co. v. Dawson, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2008
- Tarrant County v. ChanceyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1997
- Schexnider v. Scott & White Memorial Hospital, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)1997
- Reyna v. Safeway Managing General Agency for State & County Mutual Fire Insurance Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2000
- 21st Mortgage Corporation v. Beverly Hines, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2016
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.