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

the full factual evidentiary Record filed herein on May 27, 2010 and applicable in
all three of Relator’s Petitions ante.
12. These constitutional issues include CLD’s systematic, discriminatory,
impermissible, selective enforcement of DR 7.03 ante. This violates both Relator’s
Texas and federally protected, constitutional privileges and immunities enumerated
therein (Exhibits “A”-“BBB” May 27, 2010), under O’Quinn ante. These can be
addressed now, if necessary here, after rulings on Rules 3.02, 3.07, 3.08B and
15.05, rather than defer them to a trial judge and jury, after a full evidentiary
hearing. They are raised here for determination as a matter of law, should this
Court reach them.
b. But, both of this Court’s above Rules 3.02 and 3.07 are dispositive and
determinative of all matters here. Finally, the facts are largely, if not totally, not
disputed or disputable below by CLD.
There is no judge duly exercising
jurisdiction then and now because of by operation by law enforcing this Court’s
mandatory Rule 3.02 ante, timely and properly invoked by Relator.
13. Relator’s writs seeks alternatively this writ of prohibition, injunction, as well
as mandamus relief in seeking this Court’s enforcement of its mandatory RDP (1)
Rule 3.02 ante, and (2) Rule 3.07 as supplemented by its RDP Rule 3.08(B), which
is further supplemented by its this Court’s Administrative Rule 61 and (2)
T.R.Civ.P. 165(a)(1) and (2).
12