Opinion
14-19-00861-CV
10-19-2022
IN RE FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., Relator
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 270TH DISTRICT COURT HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS TRIAL COURT CAUSE NO. 2017-49530
Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher (successor to Chief Justice Frost who was on the original mandamus opinion) and Justices Wise and Hassan.
ORDER
PER CURIAM
On October 29, 2019, FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, FedEx asked this court to compel the Honorable Dedra Davis, presiding judge of the 270th District Court of Harris County, to vacate her October 28, 2019 orders denying FedEx's motions to quash subpoenas and for protective orders.
On May 28, 2020, we issued a majority opinion directing the trial court to set aside its October 28, 2019 order denying FedEx's motions to quash subpoenas for Michael Sear and an unnamed corporate representative and for protective orders. See In re FedEx Ground Package Sys., 609 S.W.3d 153, 162 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2020, orig. proceeding), mandamus granted in part, In re Brown, No. 20-0992, 2022 WL 4112368 (Tex. Sept. 9, 2022). We also lifted our stay entered on October 29, 2019. This court overruled Zach Brown's motion for rehearing en banc on November 5, 2020.
On December 21, 2020, Brown filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the Texas Supreme Court against this court. On September 9, 2022, the supreme court conditionally granted Brown's petition, in part, and directed this court to vacate our order granting relief of quashing Brown's trial subpoena (but also explained that Brown did not challenge our ruling regarding the subpoena related to Michael Sear and so that ruling remained intact). See Brown, 2022 WL 4112368, at *1 n.2, *2.
In accordance with the supreme court's instructions, we vacate our May 28, 2020 ruling directing the trial court to set aside its October 28, 2019 order denying FedEx's motions to quash subpoenas and for protective orders as to the unnamed corporate representative. The case remains under submission to this court. We stay the order as to the unnamed corporate representative trial deposition pending the completion of this mandamus.