In the Interest of K.V.K, a child Appeal from 256th Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion )

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Dismiss; and Opinion Filed June 24, 2015. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-15-00547-CV IN THE INTEREST OF K.V.K, A CHILD On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-12-19679 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Justice Stoddart This is an attempted appeal of the trial court’s February 13, 2015 order holding appellant in contempt of court and the trial court’s April 1, 2015 order denying appellant’s motion for new trial with regard to the contempt order. On May 29, 2015, appellee moved to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant has not responded to the motion to dismiss. We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. Courts of appeals lack jurisdiction to review contempt orders on direct appeal. Tracy v. Tracy, 219 S.W.3d 527, 530 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2007, no pet.). A party seeking review of a contempt order involving confinement may seek appellate review by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus; a party seeking review of a contempt order that does not involve confinement may seek review only by filing a petition for writ of mandamus. Tracy, 219 S.W.3d at 530. Because appellant challenges only the trial court’s contempt order, we may not assert jurisdiction over this appeal. We dismiss the appeal. / Craig Stoddart/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE 150547F.P05 –2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT IN THE INTEREST OF K.V.K, A CHILD On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-12-19679. Opinion delivered by Justice Stoddart. Chief Justice Wright and Justice Lang-Miers participating. No. 05-15-00547-CV In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. It is ORDERED that appellee, RYAN VON HOFGAARDEN, recover his costs of this appeal from appellant, HANNA KUBYSHKINA. Judgment entered this 24th day of June, 2015. –3–

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.