Hill v. Court of Appeals for Fifth Dist.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that to obtain relief in a mandamus proceeding, a relator must establish that the trial court failed to perform a ministerial duty, and that the relator has no other adequate legal remedy
• holding that to demonstrate entitlement to a writ of mandamus, a relator must establish that the trial court failed to perform a ministerial duty, and that relator has no other adequate legal remedy
• holding that to demonstrate entitlement to a writ of mandamus, a relator must establish that the trial court failed 1 to perform a ministerial duty and that the relator has no other adequate legal remedy
• a “clear legal right” cannot exist for issue of first impression because the law is necessarily “equivocal or unsettled”
• To demonstrate entitlement to a writ of mandamus, a relator must establish that the trial court failed to perform a ministerial duty, and that relator has no other adequate legal remedy.
• Under the ministerial act/clear legal right requirement, the law must set forth the duty to be performed with such clarity and certainty that nothing is left to the trial court’s exercise of discretion or judgment.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).