law-discovery-presuit | TRCP 202 | discovery-disputes | discovery rules | objections to discovery | motion to
compel discovery | discovery sanctions | discovery mandamus | DISCOVERY DISPUTES | PRE-SUIT DISCOVERY |
CHALLENGING DISCOVERY ORDERS BY MANDAMUS | DISCOVERY SANCTIONS | THE DISCOVERY RULE |
PRE-SUIT DISCOVERY: TEXAS SUPREME COURT OPINIONS
In re Kiberu, No. 07-0959 (Tex. Aug. 29, 2008)(per curiam) (presuit discovery, HCLC)
IN RE SIMON KIBERU AND HARRIS METHODIST H-E-B HOSPITAL; from Tarrant County; 2nd district
(02-07-00312-CV, 237 SW3d 445, 11-01-07)
stay order issued November 30, 2007, lifted
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court conditionally
grants the petition for writ of mandamus.
Per Curiam Opinion
This case may involve potential healthcare liability claims. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code ch. 74. The trial
court authorized presuit depositions pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 202. The court of appeals
denied mandamus relief. 237 S.W.3d 445. Without hearing oral argument, see Texas Rule of Appellate
Procedure 52.8(c), we conditionally grant the writ of mandamus, and direct the court of appeals to withdraw its
previous opinion and reconsider relators’ petition in light of In re Jorden, 249 S.W.3d 416 (Tex. 2008). We are
confident the court will comply with our directive, and the writ will issue only if the court fails to do so.
CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE