Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (1st Dist.).

IN RE GULF COAST FLOORING &SERVICES, LLC, Relator

NO. 01-25-00057-CV

|

Opinion issued July 3, 2025

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

Attorneys &Firms

Daniel Joseph Madden, John Yadamec, Giorgio Caflisch, for Relator.

Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Gunn, and Dokupil.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

*1 Relator, Gulf Coast Flooring &Services, LLC, filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s December 18, 2024 order denying its “Plea to the Jurisdiction and Plea in Abatement.”¹ Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus argued that the trial court erred in denying its plea to the jurisdiction and plea in abatement because real parties in interest Erix J. Medina, as Representative of the Estate of Alexander Uzcategui, Deceased, Kerany Echeto Silva, Individually and as Next Friend of Alleged Minors, A.U.E. and A.J.U.E., Alexandra Uzcategui Echeto, Gabriela Uzcategui Echeto, Yanella Uzcategui Echeto, and Maria Canizalez de Uzcategui failed to exhaust all administrative remedies before the Texas Department of Insurance-Division of Workers’ Compensation, which relator argued has exclusive jurisdiction to make the initial determination of employee versus independent contractor status, prior to asserting their claims and causes of action in the probate court.

On June 13, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court decided Univ. of Tex. Rio Grande Valley v. Oteka, — S.W.3d —, 2025 WL 1668315 (Tex. 2025), which involved the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction under circumstances similar to those presented in the mandamus petition presented to this Court by relator. Real parties in interest contend that Oteka forecloses mandamus relief; relator, however, draws a different conclusion from Oteka.

We deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus, but without prejudice to relator’s right to request the probate court to reconsider its ruling in light of the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Oteka. We dismiss any pending motions as moot.