in Re Contract Freighters, Inc. D/B/A Cfi, and Randall Scott Folks, 646 S.W.3d 810

Passenger Jimmy and Paula McPherson sued trucker Randall Folks and employer Contract Freighters, Inc. (CFI) after Folks’s tractor-trailer rear-ended their vehicle, alleging negligence and related claims against Folks and vicarious and direct liability against CFI.
McPhersons served discovery including a 10-year nationwide "collision-history" interrogatory asking for every CFI motor-vehicle-collision lawsuit, and a USDOT third-party deposition/records request covering CFI records generally (initially 2010–2020) plus actions on the accident date.
The trial court limited scope to rear-end collisions involving similar CFI vehicles during the five years before the accident and ordered CFI to respond; CFI moved to quash and sought mandamus in the court of appeals (denied), then petitioned the Texas Supreme Court.
After this Court requested a response to the mandamus petition, the McPhersons unilaterally withdrew the challenged discovery requests but did not seek to vacate the trial-court order or provide a binding assurance they would not refile similar requests.
The Supreme Court held the unilateral withdrawal did not moot the controversy, found the approved discovery overbroad as a matter of law, and conditionally granted mandamus directing the trial court to vacate its discovery order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the McPhersons’ post-petition withdrawal moots the mandamus	Withdrawal renders dispute moot; Court lacks jurisdiction	Unilateral withdrawal is insufficient; no enforceable assurance or vacatur	Not moot — withdrawal alone doesn’t bar review; jurisdiction secure
Whether the collision-history interrogatory is overbroad	Nationwide 5-year history may show pattern and CFI’s liability	Overbroad, irrelevant, and an impermissible fishing expedition	Overbroad as a matter of law; not reasonably tailored to claims
Whether the USDOT deposition/records request (five-year nationwide) is overbroad	Records may identify similar collisions and evidence of practices	Too broad in time and geography; unlikely to lead to relevant evidence	Overbroad and impermissible fishing; trial court abused discretion
Appropriate remedy for overbroad discovery	(Implicit) enforcement of trial-court order	Mandamus required to prevent enforcement of overbroad discovery	Conditionally grant writ directing trial court to vacate its order

In re Allied Chemical Corp., 227 S.W.3d 652 (Tex. 2007) (withdrawal of contested discovery orders after appellate review begins may not moot mandamus)
Dillard Dept. Stores, Inc. v. Hall, 909 S.W.2d 491 (Tex. 1995) (multi-state, five-year document searches can be overly broad as a matter of law)
In re Nat’l Lloyds Ins. Co., 449 S.W.3d 486 (Tex. 2014) (searching unrelated claim files for similarly situated claimants is an impermissible fishing expedition)
In re Ford Motor Co., 427 S.W.3d 396 (Tex. 2014) (compelling broad, long-range business/financial records was overbroad)
In re Dana Corp., 138 S.W.3d 298 (Tex. 2004) (requests for inapplicable long-range insurance or exposure policies are overbroad)
Texaco, Inc. v. Sanderson, 898 S.W.2d 813 (Tex. 1995) (discovery must be limited as to time, place, and subject matter; fishing metaphors disfavored)
In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732 (Tex. 2005) (a controversy is moot if it ceases between parties, but courts scrutinize tactical withdrawals)
Matthews v. Kountze Indep. Sch. Dist., 484 S.W.3d 416 (Tex. 2016) (party seeking mootness bears a heavy burden to show challenged conduct cannot recur)
In re Deere & Co., 299 S.W.3d 819 (Tex. 2009) (mandamus appropriate to correct trial-court abuses in discovery)
In re CSX Corp., 124 S.W.3d 149 (Tex. 2003) (withdrawal to avoid appellate review is disfavored without trial-court vacatur)