Opinion
No. 04-16-00809-CV
12-18-2017
Andrew GOSS, Appellant v. Shakia GOSS, Appellee
From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2015-CI-02273
Honorable Larry Noll, Judge Presiding
ORDER
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Appellant, Andrew Goss, appeals from a final decree of divorce. In the judgment, the trial court appointed appellant and his former wife, Shakia Goss, joint managing conservators of their children and ordered appellant to pay child support.
Appellant filed a motion in the trial court to suspend enforcement of the judgment on September 27, 2017. The trial court denied the motion on November 9, 2017. Appellant filed a notice of appeal from this ruling on November 13, 2017. In a prior order, we notified appellant that we would construe his notice of appeal as a motion for review of the denial of supersedeas under rule 24.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.
On November 10, 2017, appellant filed a motion in this court asking us to stay the enforcement of the trial court's decree pending resolution of this appeal.
This is appellant's second motion seeking a stay in this court. We denied appellant's first motion on July 27, 2017.
The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure specifically address the suspension of a judgment involving custody or conservatorship:
When the judgment involves the conservatorship or custody of a minor or other person under a legal disability, enforcement of the judgment will not be suspended, with or without security, unless ordered by the trial court. But upon proper showing, the appellate court may suspend enforcement of the judgment with or without security.TEX. R. APP. P. 24.2(a)(4). A party may seek review of the trial court's ruling by filing a motion in the appellate courts. Id. 24.4(a)(4). Appellate courts are authorized to review the trial court's determination whether to allow suspension of enforcement. Id. Additionally, in an appeal from a final order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship, an appellate court may permit an order to be suspended "on a proper showing." TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 109.002(c) (West Supp. 2017).
In the motion filed in this court, appellant argues that we should stay enforcement of the trial court's judgment because he is likely to prevail on appeal and because he and his children are suffering irreparable harm. Appellant complains that the trial court's judgment "is causing a significant disruption of care for eight children" and "several of the children refuse to stay with the [a]ppellee." Appellant also complains that the Attorney General's office is "constantly harassing him" "for tens of thousands of dollars of Title IV-D fees," "has placed a lien on his property," "threaten[ed]" his ability to "function financially," and is "threatening to take away his driver's license." Appellant further argues that no other party would be harmed by a stay, and that a stay would serve the public interest.
We conclude that appellant has not made a "proper showing" that he is entitled to suspension of enforcement of the trial court's judgment. Therefore, the trial court's order denying appellant's request for supersedeas is AFFIRMED, and appellant's motion asking us to stay enforcement of the trial court's judgment pending resolution of this appeal is DENIED.
As the clerk of the court previously advised the parties, this case will be submitted on January 9, 2018. It is so ORDERED on December 18, 2017.
PER CURIAM ATTESTED TO: /s/_________
KEITH E. HOTTLE,
Clerk of Court