Court Opinion

ID: 3123223
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 14:37:02.510633+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:42:19.548637
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-10-00348-CV
 
                                 COURT
OF APPEALS
 
                     THIRTEENTH
DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                         CORPUS
CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________
 
     IN THE INTEREST
OF A.S.D., D.E.S.D, AND J.K.S.D., CHILDREN     
____________________________________________________________
 
                     On
appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 
                                      of
Calhoun County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
 
                               MEMORANDUM
OPINION
 
Before Chief Justice Valdez and
Justices Yañez and Garza
Memorandum Opinion
Per Curiam
 

Appellant,
Joshua Stephen South, attempts to appeal a judgment of contempt entered against
him on April 13, 2010.  This court does not have jurisdiction to review
contempt orders by direct appeal.  See Norman v. Norman, 692 S.W.2d 655,
655 (Tex. 1985); Tracy v. Tracy, 219 S.W.3d 527, 530 (Tex. App.BDallas 2007, no pet.).  Contempt orders may be reviewed only by an
application for a writ of habeas corpus, if the contemnor has been confined, or
by a petition for a writ of mandamus, if the contemnor has not been confined.  See
Rosser v. Squier, 902 S.W.2d 962, 962 (Tex. 1995); Ex parte Williams,
690 S.W.2d 243, 243 (Tex. 1985); Tracy, 219 S.W.3d at 290.
The Court,
having examined and fully considered the documents on file, is of the opinion
that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  Accordingly, the
appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), (c).  All
pending motions are likewise DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.
 
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the 
5th day of August, 2010.