Opinion
No. 05-05-01268-CV
Opinion Filed October 12, 2005.
On Appeal from the 254th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. DF02-7155-R.
Dismissed.
Before Justices WHITTINGTON, FRANCIS, and LANG.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Eugene S. Bem has filed a notice of appeal from a trial court order holding him in contempt for failing to pay child support. By letter dated September 21, 2005, we questioned our jurisdiction over the appeal and asked appellant to filed a jurisdictional brief. We have received the brief, and after considering the brief and the case law in this area, we conclude we do not have jurisdiction over this appeal.
Courts of appeals generally do not have jurisdiction to review contempt orders by way of direct appeal. See In re A.C.J., 146 S.W.3d 323, 326 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 2004, no pet.); In re B.A.C., 144 S.W.3d 8, 10-12 (Tex.App.-Waco 2004, no pet.); Wead v. State, 94 S.W.3d 131, 139 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 2002), rev'd on other grounds, 129 S.W.3d 126 (Tex.Crim.App. 2004). A contempt judgment is reviewable only via a petition for writ of habeas corpus (if the contemnor is confined) or a petition for writ of mandamus (if no confinement is involved). Adams v. Bell, 94 S.W.3d 759, 761 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2002, no pet.), quoting Cadle Co. v. Lobingier, 50 S.W.3d 662, 671 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2001, pet. denied).
Because appellant is challenging the contempt order by direct appeal, we do not have jurisdiction. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
At the time appellant filed his jurisdictional brief, he also filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, which this Court docketed as Cause No. 05-05-01363-CV, styled In re Eugene S. Bem. A panel of this Court today denied relief in the original proceeding.