 
 




                                     In The

                               Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                           ____________________
                             NO. 09-14-00378-CV
                           ____________________



                       IN RE DAVID EARL STANLEY


_______________________________________________________              ______________

                              Original Proceeding
________________________________________________________              _____________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

      David Earl Stanley filed an original petition for a writ of mandamus to

compel the Judge of the 258th District Court to rule on motions that Stanley filed

in a forfeiture proceeding. Stanley states that he filed the motions pro se while

represented by counsel. “[A] trial court is under no mandatory duty to accept or

consider pleadings filed pro se by a party who is represented by counsel.” In re

Sondley, 990 S.W.2d 361, 362 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, orig. proceeding); see

also Tex. R. Civ. P. 7. We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

      PETITION DENIED.

                                        1
 
 
 




                                                 PER CURIAM


Submitted on September 24, 2014
Opinion Delivered September 25, 2014

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




                                       2
 
