Court Opinion

ID: 4403828
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-06-05 23:48:15.32448+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:48:25.043056
License: Public Domain

In The

                                 Court of Appeals

                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                                __________________

                                NO. 09-19-00166-CV
                                __________________

                       IN RE S.E. AND M.E.
__________________________________________________________________

                         Original Proceeding
        County Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas
                   Trial Cause No. 19-02-03054-CV
__________________________________________________________________

                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

      In this original mandamus proceeding, S.E. and M.E. challenge the order

appointing the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services as the temporary

managing conservator of their minor children. See generally Tex. Fam. Code Ann.

§ 262.201(j) (West Supp. 2018). They argue: (1) the order is void because M.E. filed

a timely objection to the assignment of the retired judge who signed the order; (2)

insufficient evidence supports the conservatorship order; (3) the trial court violated

S.E.’s due process rights by refusing to allow her to exceed the one-hour limit, per

party, that the trial court imposed during the adversary hearing; and (4) the trial court

                                           1
violated S.E.’s due process rights by refusing to allow S.E. to cross-examine the

witnesses to support her offer of proof. Based on the record before us, we conclude

that the relators have not shown they are entitled to relief. See Walker v. Packer, 827
S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we deny the

petition for a writ of mandamus and the motion for temporary relief. See Tex. R.

App. P. 52.8(a).

      PETITION DENIED.

                                                            PER CURIAM

Submitted on June 3, 2019
Opinion Delivered June 3, 2019

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

                                          2