Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-16-00591-CV

IN RE David Gordon LEWIS

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

Opinion by: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 7, 2016

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS CONDITIONALLY GRANTED 

Relator David Lewis seeks mandamus relief from an order holding him in contempt of 

court. This court stayed enforcement of the contempt order and requested a response. Real party 

in interest Debra Lewis timely filed a response. Because the trial court’s September 16, 2016 

contempt order is void, we conditionally grant David Lewis’s petition for writ of mandamus.

BACKGROUND

David Lewis filed an original petition for divorce from his wife, Debra Lewis, in October, 

2015, in the county court at law of Kendall County, Texas. Debra filed an answer, and the parties 

engaged in litigation. On August 1, 2016, while the divorce proceeding was still pending, Debra 

filed a motion for enforcement seeking to have David found in contempt for alleged violations of 

 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 15-521-CCL, styled In the Matter of the Marriage of David Gordon Lewis 

and Debra Lewis and In the Interest of W.G.L. and E.G.I., Children, pending in the County Court at Law, Kendall 

County, Texas, the Honorable William R. Palmer Jr. presiding.
04-16-00591-CV

- 2 -

a “Standing Order Regarding Property and Conduct of Parties in Divorce and Suits Affecting the 

Parent-Child Relationship.” The standing order was adopted by the district and county courts of 

Bandera, Gillespie, Kendall, and Kerr Counties; it became effective on May 11, 2016. After a 

hearing, on September 16, 2016, the trial court granted Debra’s motion and ordered David confined 

in the Kendall County jail for 90 days, and David sought mandamus review of the contempt order.

ANALYSIS

“Contempt of court is broadly defined as disobedience to or disrespect of a court by acting 

in opposition to its authority.” Ex parte Chambers, 898 S.W.2d 257, 259 (Tex. 1995) (orig. 

proceeding). “A criminal contempt conviction for disobedience to a court order requires proof 

beyond a reasonable doubt of: (1) a reasonably specific order; (2) a violation of the order; and (3) 

the willful intent to violate the order.”1 Id. If there is no evidence that the alleged contemnor 

violated the order, the order is void. Id. at 259–60.

Here, in her motion and in the evidence she presented at the hearing, Debra recited specific 

acts by David between December 1, 2015, and February 29, 2016, as evidence that he violated the 

May 11, 2016 standing order. David’s actions taken months before the standing order became 

effective are no evidence that he violated the May 11, 2016 order. See id. at 259. 

Because there was no evidence David violated the May 11, 2016 standing order, nor could 

he have violated a post-dated standing order, the trial court’s September 16, 2016 contempt order 

is void. See id.

 2 The case before this court is involves a criminal contempt order because the order is “aimed at punishing a completed 

act. Ex parte Werblud, 536 S.W.2d 542, 545 (Tex. 1976) (orig. proceeding).
04-16-00591-CV

- 3 -

CONCLUSION

We conditionally grant mandamus and order the trial court to vacate the order on the 

motion for enforcement signed on September 16, 2016.

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice