MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relators Jennifer Nutt and 3CPL Holdings LLC filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the trial court’s alleged failure or refusal to rule on their pending motion to dismiss Cause No. 23-2546-C395. Relators argue that a settlement agreement with Real Parties

in Interest requires dismissal, but Real Parties in Interest disagree. To establish an abuse of discretion for failure to rule, a relator must show that: (1) the trial court had a legal duty to rule on the motion, (2) she made a demand for the trial court to rule, and (3) the trial court failed or refused to rule within a reasonable time. See In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex. App.—Amarillo

2001, orig. proceeding) (citing O’Connor v. First Court of Appeals, 837 S.W.2d 94, 97

(Tex. 1992)).

Here, however, the record does not reflect that Relators have demanded a ruling on their motion, which they filed on March 13, 2025. Accordingly, Relators’ petition fails to establish that they “made a demand for the trial court to rule” and that the motion has been pending for an unreasonable length of time. See, e.g., In re Halley, No. 03-15-00310-CV, 2015 WL 4448831, at

*2 (Tex. App.—Austin July 14, 2015) (orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (concluding that delay of less than six months did not constitute unreasonable length of time under “failure to rule” analysis);

In re Blakeney, 254 S.W.3d 659, 661 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2008, orig. proceeding)

(determining that six-month delay in ruling would not be unreasonable).

Having reviewed the petition and the record provided, we cannot conclude that

Relators are entitled to the extraordinary relief requested and deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

__________________________________________ Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice

Before Justices Triana, Theofanis, and Crump

Filed: August 26, 2025