Court Opinion

ID: 2925845
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 21:27:58.566885+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:11.397568
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-08-004-CV

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
______________________________________________________________

     IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MICHAEL S. MOSES
_____________________________________________________________

          On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2
                    of Victoria County, Texas.
______________________________________________________________

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
             Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Benavides
                    Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

       Appellant, Stephen Moses, attempts to appeal a judgment of contempt entered

against him on December 17, 2007. 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.–Dallas 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).

                                                            PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and
filed this the 6th day of March, 2008.

                                           2