 
 




                                      In The

                                Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                              _________________
                               NO. 09-17-00424-CV
                              _________________


                         IN RE MICHAEL KENNEDY

________________________________________________________________________

                             Original Proceeding
                  411th District Court of Polk County, Texas
                          Trial Cause No. CIV31334
________________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Michael Kennedy filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the trial

court to rule on Kennedy’s motions for an injunction. Kennedy supplemented his

mandamus petition with copies of documents that indicate that a final order or

judgment has been signed.

      To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court

has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy.

In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig.

proceeding). Generally, there is no benefit to mandamus relief after an appealable

                                          1
 
 
 




judgment has been signed. See In re Energy Transfer Fuel, L.P., 298 S.W.3d 348,

351 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2009, orig. proceeding).

      After reviewing Kennedy’s mandamus petition and appendices, we conclude

that he has not shown that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition

for a writ of mandamus is denied.

      PETITION DENIED.



                                                            PER CURIAM


Submitted on January 10, 2018
Opinion Delivered January 11, 2018

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.




                                          2
 
