in Re First Reserve Management, L.P. First Reserve Corporation, L.L.C. FR XII Alpha AIV, L.P. FR XII-A Alpha AIV, L.P. FR Sawgrass, L.P. And Sawgrass Holdings, L.P.
09-21-00374-CV
Tex. App.Jan 13, 2022Background:
- First Reserve (several affiliated entities) filed a petition for writ of mandamus after the trial court denied its Rule 91a motion to dismiss.
- Rule 91a permits dismissal when a cause of action has no basis in law or in fact and requires the court to decide based solely on the pleadings (and permitted exhibits).
- Plaintiffs filed a 63‑page Third Amended Petition on October 6, 2021, alleging causes of action and factual predicates; under Rule 91a the court must accept pleaded facts as true for purposes of the motion.
- The governing pleading standard is that a petition must give the defendant fair notice of the claim and the basic issues and relevant testimony (per Kinder Morgan).
- First Reserve argued the petition lacked any legal or factual basis; plaintiffs argued the petition sufficiently pleads causes of action and gives fair notice.
- The court of appeals concluded the Third Amended Petition gave fair notice and the trial court did not abuse its discretion; the mandamus petition was denied.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Third Amended Petition has no basis in law or fact under Tex. R. Civ. P. 91a | Petition pleads causes of action and gives fair notice of claims and facts | Petition is legally and factually baseless and should be dismissed under Rule 91a | Denied — court held petition provides fair notice; allegations must be taken as true at this stage |
| Whether mandamus relief is warranted to overturn denial of a Rule 91a motion | Mandamus not needed if petition is sufficient; ordinary appeal may suffice | Mandamus appropriate to prevent waste if trial court abused discretion by denying Rule 91a | Denied — no abuse of discretion shown, so mandamus relief not granted |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Essex Ins. Co., 450 S.W.3d 524 (Tex. 2014) (mandamus may be appropriate when trial court abuses discretion denying a Rule 91a motion)
- Kinder Morgan SACROC, LP v. Scurry Cty., 622 S.W.3d 835 (Tex. 2021) (a petition is sufficient only if it gives fair notice of the claim and basic issues)