Court Opinion

ID: 9684189
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 13:49:55.818922+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:53.821917
License: Public Domain

MURRAY, Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent. While I agree that this Court does not have jurisdiction of the application for writ of habeas corpus of Rutherford and his application must be dismissed, I do not agree that the opinion by the El Paso Court of Civil Appeals has the effect of suspending the judgment of the trial court until the appeal is final. Neither the trial court, nor the Court of Civil Appeals has entered an order suspending the judgment of August 31, 1976, although requested to do so. This case is now pending in the Supreme Court and it has power under the Code1 to suspend “on a proper showing.” The provisions of 11.19(c) provide an orderly and understandable method of suspending the effects of the trial court’s judgment pending an appeal. This Court is in effect suspending the trial court’s judgment pending an appeal, overruling the refusal to suspend of the trial court and the Court of Civil Appeals and depriving the Supreme Court of the opportunity to suspend “on a proper showing.”
It is not desirable to have the possession of a child changed each time an opinion of a court is handed down, or a new opinion is substituted, or a motion for rehearing is granted.
Fly and Hanson are, at least, some authority that the effect of an application for writ of error is that the appeal is still pending. Is the appeal still pending in this case? I would hold that it is.

. Tex. Family Code Ann. § 11.19(c) (1975).