In Re Wilma Reynolds and Carl Gordon v. the State of Texas

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Majority Opinion
filed October 4, 2024; and Memorandum Dissenting Opinion filed October 29,
2024.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-24-00715-CV

IN RE WILMA REYNOLDS AND CARL GORDON, Relators

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
WRIT OF MANDAMUS
152nd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 2017-83411

MEMORANDUM DISSENTING OPINION

Persisting in my view that our duty as judges is to reach a decision on the
merits based on a proper record and that due process and due course of law require
that this court give notice when the original-proceeding record does not comply
with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, I would give relator ten-days’ notice
of involuntary dismissal for failure to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate
Procedure 52.7(a) requiring that every document that is material to the relators’
claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding be certified or
sworn, or contain an unsworn declaration. Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a)(2); Tex. Civ.
Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 132.001; see In re Kholaif, 624 S.W.3d 228, 231
(order), mand. dism’d, 615 S.W.3d 369 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2020)
(orig. proceeding).

I dissent from the court’s failure to provide notice and an opportunity to
cure. I express no opinion on the merits of the petition for a writ of mandamus.

/s/ Charles A. Spain
Justice

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Spain and Poissant (Spain,
J., dissenting).

2