In the Interest of A.M. and E.M., children Appeal from 397th Judicial District Court of Grayson County (memorandum opinion by chief justice wright)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Dismiss and Opinion Filed June 13, 2016 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-00437-CV IN THE INTEREST OF A.M. AND E.M., CHILDREN On Appeal from the 397th Judicial District Court Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 07-1232-397 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright In a letter dated May 12, 2016, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over this appeal. Specifically, it appeared that appellant sought to appeal the trial court’s January 11, 2016 Order on Enforcement for Possession which adjudged appellant in contempt of court. We instructed appellant to file a letter brief addressing our jurisdictional concern and gave appellee an opportunity to respond. In a letter dated May 23, 2016, appellant conceded that the Court does not have jurisdiction over this appeal and that mandamus relief is the appropriate remedy. Appellees have not responded to date. 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 pursuing review of a contempt order involving confinement may file a petition for writ of habeas corpus; a party seeking review of a contempt order that does not involve confinement may file a petition for writ of mandamus. Id. Because appellant challenges only the trial court's contempt order, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE 160437F.P05 –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT IN THE INTEREST OF A.M. AND E.M., CHILDREN No. 05-16-00437-CV On Appeal from the 397th Judicial District Court, Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 07-1232-397. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart participating. V. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. We ORDER that appellees Jerry Byron and Dian Byron recover their costs of this appeal from appellant David Eugene Martin. Judgment entered June 13, 2016. –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.
