Full Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-26-00728-CV In re Wesley E. Long ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM BELL COUNTY MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator Wesley E. Long has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the trial court’s alleged failure or refusal to rule on his motion to compel discovery. For the reasons discussed herein, we deny the petition. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). It is relator’s burden to properly request and show entitlement to mandamus relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding); In re Davidson, 153 S.W.3d 490, 491 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2004, orig. proceeding); see also Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (“Even a pro se applicant for a writ of mandamus must show himself entitled to the extraordinary relief he seeks.”). In this regard, the relator must provide the reviewing court with a record sufficient to establish relator’s right to mandamus relief. See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837; In re Blakeney, 254 S.W.3d 659, 661–62 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2008, orig. proceeding). “A trial court has a ministerial duty to consider and rule on motions properly filed and pending before it, and mandamus may issue to compel the trial court to act.” In re Sanchez, No. 03-25-01036-CV, 2025 WL 3775286, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin Dec. 31, 2025, orig. proceeding) (mem op.) (citing In re Pete, 589 S.W.3d 320, 321 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, orig. proceeding) (per curiam)). When a mandamus petition is based on an allegation that a trial court has failed to rule on a properly filed motion, the relator must establish that the trial court: (1) had a legal duty to rule on the motion; (2) was asked to rule on the motion; and (3) either refused to rule on the motion or failed to rule within a reasonable time. In re Whitfield, No. 03-18-00564-CV, 2018 WL 4140735, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 29, 2018, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (citing In re Keeter, 134 S.W.3d 250, 252 (Tex. App.—Waco 2003, orig. proceeding)). Long has failed to provide this Court with a record demonstrating he requested a hearing on his motion to compel discovery with the trial court. There is no correspondence with the trial judge (or appropriate court coordinator) expressly requesting a hearing on the motion on the record. On this record, we conclude that relator has failed to show entitlement to mandamus relief. Accordingly, his petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). __________________________________________ Gisela D. Triana, Justice Before Justices Triana, Crump, and Ellis Filed: August 14, 2026 2