In Re John Davis v. the State of Texas

Opinion filed February 12, 2026

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals
__________

No. 11-26-00015-CV
__________

IN RE JOHN DAVIS

Original Mandamus Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On January 28, 2026, Relator, John Davis, filed a petition for writ of
mandamus. In the petition, Relator requested that we compel the trial court to rule
on the parties’ pending summary judgment motions in the proceedings below. In
this regard, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and the trial court
set the hearing for such motions by submission for October 10, 2025. However, and
according to Relator, the trial court failed to rule on the motions in a timely manner,
resulting in the instant mandamus petition.
We asked for a response from counsel for the Real Parties in Interest. In their
response, counsel states that the trial court has ruled on the motions that are the
subject of this proceeding and has signed a final judgment incorporating its rulings.
A file-marked copy of the trial court’s final judgment is included in the appendix.
The trial court’s final judgment recites its rulings on the parties’ motions for
summary judgment and reflects that the “judgment disposes of all claims and all
parties and is appealable.” Counsel states that trial court’s rulings and final judgment
“eliminate[] the controversy in this proceeding” and render the matter moot.
We agree that Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is now moot because
the trial court has provided the relief that Relator seeks from this court. See In re
Carlson, 712 S.W.3d 71, 75 (Tex. 2025) (orig. proceeding) (“Because no . . . dispute
remains, we are obliged to dismiss the mandamus petition as moot.”); In re
Chaparral Pipeline Co., LLC, No. 11-22-00312-CV, 2023 WL 162800, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Eastland Jan. 12, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (The trial court
provided the relator with the relief sought, rendering the petition for writ of
mandamus moot.). We lack jurisdiction to decide a moot controversy. Carlson, 712
S.W.3d at 73, 75.
Accordingly, we dismiss Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus for want of
jurisdiction.

W. STACY TROTTER
JUSTICE

February 12, 2026
Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,
Trotter, J., and Williams, J.

2