Full Opinion

NUMBER 13-26-00687-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG IN RE COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Silva, Peña, and West Memorandum Opinion by Justice West 1 By petition for writ of mandamus, relator Costco Wholesale Corporation asserts that the trial court abused its discretion by denying relator’s motion to transfer venue to 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). Brooks County because “an impartial trial cannot be had in Hidalgo County where the personal injury plaintiffs are a sitting judge in another county court at law and his spouse.” See TEX. R. CIV. P. 257. “Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that is available in limited circumstances to correct clear errors in exceptional cases.” In re Rogers, 728 S.W.3d 717, 719 (Tex. 2026) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (citation modified); see In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 138 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Mandamus is discretionary in nature and it is governed by equitable principles. In re First Rsrv. Mgmt., L.P., 671 S.W.3d 653, 663 (Tex. 2023) (orig. proceeding); In re Garza, 544 S.W.3d 836, 840 (Tex. 2018) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam). To obtain a writ of mandamus, the relator must show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and the relator lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. In re Lapuerta, 732 S.W.3d 548, 555 (Tex. 2026) (orig. proceeding). A trial court abuses its discretion when it acts in disregard of guiding rules or principles or in an arbitrary or unreasonable manner, or when it fails to analyze or apply the law correctly. In re Kappmeyer, 668 S.W.3d 651, 655 (Tex. 2023) (orig. proceeding). We generally do not grant a petition for mandamus for non-mandatory venue determinations absent extraordinary circumstances. See In re Team Rocket, L.P., 256 S.W.3d 257, 262 (Tex. 2008) (orig. proceeding); In re Masonite Corp., 997 S.W.2d 194, 197 (Tex. 1999) (orig. proceeding). The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, the response filed by real parties in interest Rodolfo “Rudy” Gonzalez and Diana 2 Gonzalez, and the applicable law, is of the opinion that relator has not met its burden to obtain relief. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. JON WEST Justice Delivered and filed on the 15th day of October, 2026. 3