Doreen Renee Sims v. Paul Clement Sweeney Appeal from 201st District Court of Travis County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-16-00247-CV Doreen Renee Sims, Appellant v. Paul Clement Sweeney, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 201ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-FM-13-005852, HONORABLE GISELA D. TRIANA, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION On April 7, 2016, appellant filed a notice of appeal stating she was appealing from the trial court’s “judgments” rendered December 11, 2015, and March 9, 2016. She also filed an affidavit of indigence and, when the court reporter filed a contest to that affidavit, we abated the cause to the trial court for a hearing on the matter. The trial court held a hearing and issued an order sustaining the contest. However, rather than making any determinations related to indigence, the trial court informed us that appellant was seeking to appeal from temporary orders in a family case. The court also provided copies of the orders that appellant apparently seeks to appeal. One was signed by the trial court on December 14, 2015, and stated that on December 11, the court held a hearing and ordered appellant to begin cooperative parenting classes, scheduled appellee’s visitation with the child, and ordered the parties to return to court on March 9, 2016, for a review of the visitation schedule. The other was signed March 9, and recited that the court had held a hearing to review appellee’s visitation with the child and ordered that appellee’s visitations be increased. On October 27, after we received those documents, we sent appellant notice that it appeared she was attempting to appeal from unappealable interlocutory orders. We asked for a response no later than November 8. To date, appellant has not responded to our letter. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). __________________________________________ David Puryear, Justice Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Field Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction Filed: December 16, 2016 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.
