approximately one-month period of prolonged pain and disability. Foster, 303 S.W.3d at 840-41. We held that the report was adequate as to this claim. Id. Richardson is not required to perfect a second interlocutory appeal in order to require the trial court to give effect to our judgment and mandate in Foster. Requiring Richardson to pursue a second interlocutory appeal to obtain relief we have already granted in a prior interlocutory appeal is not an adequate remedy at law. See Columbia Med. Ctr., 306 S.W.3d at 248 (explaining that “[b]ecause this issue arises in connection with a final judgment following an appeal to this Court, we conclude that Columbia now has no other adequate remedy by appeal”); see generally In re Masonite Corp., 997 S.W.2d 194, 198 (Tex.1999) (orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>). V. Conclusion Because the trial court’s
holding that where the final judgment provided relief that was not requested  its entry constituted reversible error recognizing that an appellate court reviews a trial courts decision whether or not to grant equitable relief only for an abuse of discretion holding that the judges entry into the jury room constituted reversible error recognizing appellate remedy inadequate when trial courts abuse of discretion constituted automatic reversible error holding exclusion of defendants nephews prior inconsistent statement constituted reversible error