in Re Paula M. Miller, 01-16-00132-CV

Paula Miller filed lis pendens and an affidavit of adverse possession against property owned by JAS Family Ltd. Partnership while contesting ownership; the trial court ordered those notices released and Miller appealed unsuccessfully.
After appellate dismissal and refusing to execute court-approved releases, Miller failed to appear for a September 2015 hearing; the trial court scheduled contempt proceedings and set a $25,000 cash appearance bond for her release.
Michael Brown posted the $25,000 cash bond to secure Miller’s release; the sheriff gave Brown a receipt for return of the funds after compliance.
Miller appeared, argued various defenses, and ultimately was held in contempt in February 2016; she then executed the requested releases and the court awarded JAS attorney’s fees.
Miller filed original mandamus petitions (one filed the morning of the February hearing; another after proceedings concluded, joined by Brown) seeking dismissal of contempt, recusal, return of the $25,000 bond, voiding of the releases, and attorney’s fees; the Court of Appeals denied relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Miller/Brown)	Defendant's Argument (JAS/Prince)	Held
Whether contempt proceedings should be dismissed or rendered moot	Miller argued contempt should be dismissed because she appeared and signed releases	JAS contended proceedings were proper and relief was not warranted	Denied as moot: Miller complied by executing releases; contempt challenge is moot
Whether the trial judge should be recused / independent judge appointed	Miller sought recusal and assignment to an independent judge	JAS noted prior recusal motion was denied as groundless by presiding judge	Denied: mandamus not available for recusal denial; no verified new motion in record
Whether bond funds must be returned to Brown immediately from court registry	Brown/Miller contended bond must be returned after Miller complied with appearance conditions	Prince sought garnishment of bond to satisfy outstanding judgment against Miller	Denied: relators failed to show they presented a motion and obtained a ruling; record inadequate to compel release
Whether releases and contempt findings should be declared void and attorney’s fees awarded	Miller sought declaratory relief voiding contempt and releases and asked for fees for this proceeding	JAS argued releases flowed from final judgment affirmed on appeal and mandamus sanction standards not met	Denied: releases tied to final judgment; mandamus inappropriate; no basis for fees under Rule 52.11

In re Reece, 341 S.W.3d 360 (Tex. 2011) (mandamus standard: clear abuse of discretion and no adequate appellate remedy)
Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833 (Tex. 1992) (mandamus to compel ministerial acts; relator’s burden to present record)
Baize v. Shaver, 935 S.W.2d 498 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1996) (trial court cannot confiscate bail except for bond-condition violation; clerk must return bail)
Ex parte Kimsey, 915 S.W.2d 523 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1995) (contempt order moot once contemnor’s obligation discharged)
In re Office of the Attorney General, 422 S.W.3d 623 (Tex. 2013) (civil contempt is quasi‑criminal; proceedings should conform to criminal procedures)
De Leon v. Pennington, 759 S.W.2d 201 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1988) (cash bail must be refunded after defendant complies with bond conditions)
Stoner v. Massey, 586 S.W.2d 843 (Tex. 1979) (mandamus requires demand and refusal to act by trial court)
In re McKee, 248 S.W.3d 164 (Tex. 2007) (mandamus not available to challenge denial of recusal)