Petition for Writ of Prohibition - Filed - Supreme Court of Texas

9. Confusion has sometimes arisen as to the demarcation line between writs of
(1) prohibition and (2) Writs of Mandamus by this Court and/or the Courts of
Appeal.
A recognized authority, William V. Dorsaneo, III 6 , suggests and Relator here
adopts it and files both of his above alternative petitions because of overlap (and in
fact, all three writs seeking relief out of an abundance of caution), as follows:
“...Therefore, if a relator seeks to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Texas
Supreme Court to control the actions of a lower court when those actions do not
constitute an interference with the previously invoked jurisdiction of the Texas
Supreme Court, the petitioner should probably seek a writ of mandamus as well as
a writ of prohibition in the same proceeding. This conclusion also is compelled by
a consideration of the constitutional and statutory foundation for issuance of
original writs, other than mandamus, by the Texas Supreme Court [Tex. Consti.
Art. 5§3] and the courts of appeals [Govt. C § 22.221]…” (all emphases added
throughout).
10. Relator has amply demonstrated his requisite lack of an adequate remedy at
law and that he faces irreparable harm. This is best illustrated by the lengthy
Record and Appendix (1,639 pages), filed May 27, 2010 and adopted by reference
above, (pending on Motion for Rehearing as to his concurrent Petition for Writ of
Mandamus):
a. This Court’s current RDP (Rules of Disciplinary Procedure) 3.14,
both deny him on his appeal from any final judgment of disbarment 7 , after a jury
6 Distinguished Faculty Fellow and Professor of Law, Dedman School of Law, Southern
Methodist University, “Dorsaneo”, in his treatise “Texas Litigation Guide” 2010, “Original
Proceedings Legal Background” at pps. 152-53; Sections 152.03(2)
8