### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-10-00235- CV NO. 03-10-00455- CV NO. 03-10-00456- CV NO. 03-10-00457- CV NO. 03-10-00458- CV

John S tritz inger, Appellant

v. Kat herine Wright, Appellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 345 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -F M- 04- 0046 90, H ONO RAB LE STEP HEN Y ELENOSK Y , JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
The above- ref

ere nced cause s eac h arise from the same district court cause , Cause No. D-1-F M-04-004690, a suit aff ecti ng the parent-child relationship betwee n J ohn S. Stritz inge r, I I I ; his ex-wife Katherine Wr i gh t ; and three children of their marria g e. To date, Stritz inge r, who is pro se, has filed at least five separ ate notices of appea l complaining of seven differ ent district court order s:
Appellate Cause No. District Court OrderChallenged 03-10-00235- CV J anuar y 1, 2009, “F inal Orde r in Suit Affe ctingParent-Child Relationship”03-10-00455- CV J anuar y 20, 2009, “Adde ndum to [ J anuar y 1, 2009] Final Order

in SuitAffe ctingParentChild R elationship” 03-10-00456- CV J anuar y 29, 2010, “Or der H olding Respondent in Contempt, S uspending Commi tment, And Orde r for Sanctions” 03-10-00457- CV J une 9, 2010, “O rder of Contempt to Coerce Compli ance ” J une 9, 2010, “O rder

of Contempt for Violations of Court Order ” 03-10-00458- CV J uly 9, 2010, “Or der G rantingKather ine Wright’s Motion to Quash and f or Protective Orde r” J uly 21, 2010, “Or der Requiring John Stritz inge r to Seek Court Approva l Prior to RequestingI ssuance of a Subpoena ”
Now pending in these appellate cause s are sever al motions. S t ritzi ng er has filed an unopposed motion to consolidate all five cause s to the extent of havinga sing le appe llate re cord. H e has also fi led unopposed motions to consolidate Cause Nos. 03-10-00456- CV, -00457, and -00458 fo r purposes of briefing
. Wright has moved to dismiss Stritz inge r’s two appea ls from contempt order s, Cause Nos. 0 3 -1 0-00456-CV and -00457, for want of subject-matter jurisdiction. Stritz inge r has filed a r esponse in opposition to each dismissal motion.

Be cause they conce rn the same final order , we consolidate Cause Nos. 03-10-00235- CV and -0045 5 fo r all purposes. The rec ords filed in Cause No. 03-10-00235- CV shall be transfe rre d to Cause No. 03-10-00455- CV. The consolidated cause s will proce ed under the style of Cause No. 03- 10-00455-CV. Cause No. 03-10-00235- CV is dism issed.
2B e c a u s e w e la c k s u

b je c t- ma tt e r ju r is diction over Stritz inge r’s attempted appea ls from
co ntempt order s, see Ex par te W illiams , 690 S.W .2d 243, 243 n.1 (Tex. 1985); Metzger v. S eb ek , 892 S.W .2d 20, 54-55 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dis t
. ] 1 9 9 4 , writ denied) , we grant Wright’s motions and dismiss Cause Nos. 03-10- 00456-CV and - 00457 for want of jurisdiction. In light of these dismiss als, we dismiss as moot Stritz inge r’s motions to consolidate Cause Nos. 03-10-00456- CV, -00457, and - 00458 for br iefingpurposes.

We g rant Stritz inge r’s mot i o n to consolidate the five cause s for appellate rec ord purposes to the ex tent that the parties in Cause No. 03-10 -0 0 4 5 8 -C V may rely upon the appellate
rec ord in the consolidated Cause No. 03-10-00455- CV. We otherwise dismiss that motion as moot.

__________________________________________ Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Pury ear and Pember

ton Dismissed Filed: September

29, 2010

3