Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Texas

Johnson v. Hurtt

Southern District of TexasDavid HittnerDecided July 25, 2012

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,914 written decisions from 2,661 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 1:24 a.m. CT; the Passim connector counts the live collection, which can differ by the day's additions and retirements (which total to quote). Coverage: of the 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 2026. Some of what that search finds are not mandamus decisions. Tell us about a decision we're missing.

These are counts of past written decisions and dockets, not predictions of how any case will be decided. A distribution appears only when at least 5 decisions (or 5 dockets) are behind it; smaller groups are listed, not summarized. How it's counted.

What the decision decided

Each value cites the passage it was read from. Values read by a model were checked against that passage; values read by rule come from fixed text patterns. Read the decision before relying on either.

Agency Not recorded Read by a model
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Consequently, Plaintiff seeks to bring an end to the Defendants’ current policies and compel Defendants to comply with federal laws, rules, and regulations, so that she and others may communicate with ICE.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Having considered the motion, submissions, and applicable law, the Court determines that the motion should be granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
The City move to dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Pending before the Court is Defendant The City of Houston’s Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 44).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
The Court further ORDERS that this case is DISMISSED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
ORDERS that Defendant The City of Houston’s Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 44) is GRANTED.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Pending before the Court is Defendant The City of Houston’s Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 44). Having considered the motion, submissions, and applicable law, the Court determines that the motion should be granted.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit authority

District decisions bind no one. On the questions this decision raises, the Supreme Court decisions and the circuit's published decisions listed here bind this court; a circuit disposition marked nonprecedential was not published as precedent and is persuasive only. ImmCite status as read November 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.