BEAUMONT - The Ninth Court of Appeals has denied Time Warner Cable’s writ of mandamus in a $1 million trip and fall lawsuit that was supposed to go to trial on Tuesday.
The lawsuit, filed in Jefferson County District Court, was brought by Samantha and Christopher McCormick and names Charter Communications, Time Warner Cable and Taylor Britt as defendants.
In the suit, Samantha alleges she suffered personal injuries in the home of a client while working as a speech pathologist. Britt was present in the home working for Time Warner. She claims she tripped over a cable placed by Britt.
Together, the couple seek $1 million in past and future economic damages, plus an unspecified amount of past and future non-economic damages.
Court records show the case was set to go to trial on Nov. 9 with Judge Justin Sanderson, 60th District Court, presiding.
On Nov. 5, Time Warner and the other defendants filed an emergency stay and petition for mandamus with the Ninth Court, asserting the plaintiffs hid documents that they produced six days before the trial was set to begin.
The defendants claim they were informed that Judge Sanderson would not grant their motion for continuance, which sought to continue the trial until January 2022 so they could have more time to conduct additional discovery.
On Nov. 8, the Ninth Court granted Time Warner’s motion for temporary relief while they considered the defendants’ petition for mandamus.
On Nov. 12, the Ninth Court denied the petition for mandamus, opining that on Nov. 8 the McCormick filed a motion to reconsider, in which she states the trial court has not yet ruled on the underlying discovery dispute but has taken the matter under advisement.
“To obtain extraordinary relief in a writ of mandamus, Relators must show that the trial court abused its discretion and there is no adequate remedy by appeal,” the opinion states. “Having examined the petition for a writ of mandamus, the motion for temporary relief, the motion to reconsider the stay and opposition to the motion for emergency relief, and the response to the motion to reconsider the stay, we conclude that the Relators have not established they are entitled to mandamus relief at this time.
“Therefore, we vacate our stay order issued November 8, 2021, and deny the petition for a writ of mandamus without prejudice.”
The defendants are represented in part by attorney Karen Bennett.
The plaintiffs are represented in part by Paul “Chip” Ferguson of The Ferguson Law Firm in Beaumont.
Appeals case No. 09-21-00344-CV
Trial case No. B-202984