In Re S.E. and M.E. Appeal from County Court at Law No 1 of Montgomery County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont __________________ NO. 09-19-00166-CV __________________ IN RE S.E. AND M.E. __________________________________________________________________ Original Proceeding County Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 19-02-03054-CV __________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION In this original mandamus proceeding, S.E. and M.E. challenge the order appointing the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services as the temporary managing conservator of their minor children. See generally Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 262.201(j) (West Supp. 2018). They argue: (1) the order is void because M.E. filed a timely objection to the assignment of the retired judge who signed the order; (2) insufficient evidence supports the conservatorship order; (3) the trial court violated S.E.’s due process rights by refusing to allow her to exceed the one-hour limit, per party, that the trial court imposed during the adversary hearing; and (4) the trial court 1 violated S.E.’s due process rights by refusing to allow S.E. to cross-examine the witnesses to support her offer of proof. Based on the record before us, we conclude that the relators have not shown they are entitled to relief. See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus and the motion for temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). PETITION DENIED. PER CURIAM Submitted on June 3, 2019 Opinion Delivered June 3, 2019 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 2
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.
