# In Re Donald Ray LEE, Latricia Doyal, Paulette Savage and Jonathan Chase

> Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · February 28, 2013 · 412 S.W.3d 23

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9812624

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re Donald Ray Lee, Latricia Doyal, Paulette Savage, and Jonathan Chase
- **Court:** Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
- **Decided:** February 28, 2013
- **Citations:** 412 S.W.3d 23; 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 2044; 2013 WL 812048
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Goodwin
- **Judges:** Jones, Goodwin, Field
- **Cited by:** 5 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9812624

## Opinion text

MELISSA GOODWIN,
Justice, dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. The majority concludes that “the language of section 9.04 is ambiguous, at best, concerning what review, if any, the Secretary can perform with regard to the sufficiency of the petition beyond verifying the number of signatures of qualified voters.” Given the majority’s conclusion of ambiguity, I am hard pressed to conclude that the Secretary or the members of the City Council failed to perform a ministerial act that is subject to mandamus by this Court under the confines of our standard of review. See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839 (1992) (mandamus available to compel a public official to perform ministerial act); Anderson v. City of Seven Points, 806 S.W.2d 791, 793 (Tex.1991) (stating that “[a]ct is ministerial when the law clearly spells out the duty to be performed by the official with sufficient specificity that nothing is left to the exercise of discretion”). I would accordingly deny the petition.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9812624. Public record. Not legal advice.