TBCblog

Comprehensive coverage of the Texas Business Court

Operated by

Reese Marketos LLP

Dallas, Texas  ·  Complex Commercial Litigation

Home Appellate Review Fifteenth Court of Appeals Dismisses Unopposed Mandamus Petition from Business Court Division 3A in Self-Storage Software Dispute
Appellate Review

Fifteenth Court of Appeals Dismisses Unopposed Mandamus Petition from Business Court Division 3A in Self-Storage Software Dispute

Decided October 02, 2025 Mem. Op. Motion to Dismiss DISMISSED
Read the Court's Opinion (PDF)
By Joel Reese · August 05, 2026 Fifteenth Court of Appeals

The Fifteenth Court of Appeals granted an unopposed motion to dismiss a mandamus petition filed by six self-storage software and services companies—Storable, Inc.; RedNova Labs, Inc. (d/b/a storEDGE); SitelinkSoftware, LLC; Easy Storage Solutions, LLC; Bader Co.; and Property First Group, LP—challenging a ruling from Business Court Division 3A in Travis County. The October 2, 2025 memorandum opinion provides no substantive analysis of the underlying dispute or the reasons for dismissal.

Fifteenth Court of Appeals Mandamus Rule 42.1(a) Business Court Division 3A
Writ of Mandamus Original Proceeding Jurisdiction

Background and Procedural Posture

Six companies—Storable, Inc.; RedNova Labs, Inc. (doing business as storEDGE); SitelinkSoftware, LLC; Easy Storage Solutions, LLC; Bader Co.; and Property First Group, LP—filed a petition for writ of mandamus with the Fifteenth Court of Appeals seeking review of a decision from Business Court Division 3A in Travis County. The underlying trial court case was designated 25-BC03A-0001.

The Mandamus Petition and Its Dismissal

Rather than proceeding with briefing and argument on the merits of their mandamus petition, the relators filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the original proceeding under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a). The Fifteenth Court of Appeals granted that motion in a brief memorandum opinion issued October 2, 2025, stating simply:

Relators filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this original proceeding. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a). The motion is granted. We dismiss this petition for writ of mandamus.

The opinion provides no detail regarding the nature of the Business Court ruling that prompted the mandamus petition, the legal issues the relators sought to raise, or the reasons the parties agreed to dismiss the proceeding.

Observations

While this memorandum opinion offers no substantive guidance on Business Court procedure or commercial law, it documents an appellate filing arising from Business Court Division 3A. The case shows that parties are seeking mandamus relief from Business Court rulings in the courts of appeals. The unopposed nature of the dismissal motion indicates the parties agreed to withdraw the mandamus petition, though the record does not reveal why. The panel consisted of Chief Justice Brister and Justices Field and Farris.