On January 28, 2022, the Texas Supreme Court declined to grant mandamus relief to limit discovery in a major premises-liability case. The decision was a setback for WLF, which filed a brief with the court urging mandamus. Under Texas law, a premises-liability plaintiff can subject a defendant to free-ranging and burdensome discovery only after showing that the defendant could have reasonably foreseen her injury. The trial court here refused to apply that principle. It derided the rule as “too restrictive” and faulted the Texas Supreme Court for what it viewed as inadequate guidance. In short, it refused to apply the law. In its brief, WLF urged the Texas Supreme Court to intervene and relieve Walmart of the need to produce massive amounts of burdensome discovery unrelated to the threshold issue of foreseeability. WLF’s brief was prepared with the generous pro bono assistance of Allyson N. Ho and Elizabeth Kiernan of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP in Dallas.