Court Opinion

ID: 3076934
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 01:22:52.114061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:43:45.164229
License: Public Domain

In The

                               Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                           ____________________
                              NO. 09-12-00547-CV
                           ____________________

                          IN THE INTEREST OF H.N.

_______________________________________________________            ______________

                    On Appeal from the 356th District Court
                           Hardin County, Texas
                           Trial Cause No. 37386
________________________________________________________            _____________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      The trial court signed an order enforcing and modifying the appellant’s child

support obligation. The order included a child support arrearage judgment in the

amount of $57,122.75.1 The appellant filed a notice of appeal but failed to file a

      1
        The trial court also held the appellant in contempt for failing to pay child
support on four specific dates, and assessed 180 days in jail, for each separate act
of contempt to run concurrently, as punishment, then placed the appellant on
community supervision. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 157.165 (West 2008). The
contempt part of the order must be challenged through habeas corpus or
mandamus, and is not before the Court in this appeal. See Tex. Animal Health
Comm’n v. Nunley, 647 S.W.2d 951, 952 (Tex. 1983); In re A.C.J., 146 S.W.3d
1
brief. On April 9, 2013, we notified the parties that the appellant’s brief had not

been filed, and we warned the appellant that his failure to file a brief could result in

a dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution. On April 19, 2013, we notified

the parties that the appeal would be submitted to the Court without oral argument.

See Tex. R. App. P. 39.8. In the absence of a brief assigning error for appellate

review, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1),

42.3(b).

      APPEAL DISMISSED.

                                               ________________________________
                                                         CHARLES KREGER
                                                             Justice

Submitted on May 10, 2013
Opinion Delivered May 23, 2013

Before Gaultney, Kreger, and Horton, JJ.

323, 326 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2004, no pet.). The appellant has not filed a
separate habeas proceeding. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1; Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §
157.163 (West 2008) (providing for appointment of counsel for contempt
proceedings under some circumstances). The disposition of this appeal does not
affect the contempt part of the judgment.
                                           2