In Re Cesar Espinosa and FIEL Houston, Inc. v. the State of Texas

Opinion issued January 14, 2026

In The

Court of Appeals
For The

First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-25-00789-CV
———————————
IN RE CESAR ESPINOSA AND FIEL HOUSTON, INC., Relators

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relators, Cesar Espinosa and FIEL Houston, Inc., filed a petition for writ of

mandamus challenging the trial court’s September 15, 2025 order granting the

petition to take pre-suit depositions pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 202,

filed by real party in interest, Meneses Law, PLLC.1 In their petition for writ of

1
The underlying case is Meneses Law, PLLC v. Cesar Espinosa and FIEL Houston,
Inc., Cause No. 2025-56358, in the 61st District Court of Harris County, Texas, the
Honorable Lee Kathryn Shuchart presiding
mandamus, relators argued that the trial court abused its discretion by granting the

request for pre-suit depositions despite the failure of real party in interest to present

“competent evidence” in support of its request for pre-suit depositions. Relators

therefore requested that the Court grant the petition and “[d]irect the trial court to

vacate its September 15, 2025 order and deny Meneses Law’s Rule 202 Petition.”

In connection with their petition for writ of mandamus, relators filed an

“Emergency Motion to Stay the Underlying Proceedings,” and requested that the

Court stay all proceedings in the underlying trial court cause, specifically the

depositions ordered in the trial court’s September 15, 2025 order challenged here.

The Court granted the motion and stayed any obligation to appear for a deposition

in the underlying cause pending this Court’s review of the petition for writ of

mandamus. The Court further requested a response to the petition for writ of

mandamus, and real party in interest filed a response in opposition to the request for

mandamus relief.

We conclude that relators have failed to establish they are entitled to

mandamus relief, and the Court therefore lifts the stay imposed by our September

26, 2025 order and denies relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. We dismiss any

pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Gunn and Johnson.

2