Court Opinion

ID: 3123221
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 14:37:01.969594+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:37:54.623881
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.

                                          2