From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Loudermilk v. Neal

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Dec 27, 2024
No. 05-24-01088-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 27, 2024)

Opinion

05-24-01088-CV

12-27-2024

RYAN LOUDERMILK, Appellant v. RANDY NEAL, Appellee


On Appeal from the 471st Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 471-03732-2023

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Pedersen, III J.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE.

Appellant appeals from the trial court's order granting appellee's motion to enforce a sanctions order by contempt. Asserting the order is not subject to ordinary appeal, appellee has filed a motion and supplemental motion to dismiss the appeal.

Appellant did not file a response to appellee's motions.

Contempt orders are not reviewable by direct appeal. See Herzfeld v. Herzfeld, 285 S.W.3d 122, 132 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2009, no pet.). Contempt orders involving confinement are reviewable by writ of habeas corpus; contempt orders not involving confinement are reviewable by mandamus. See id.

Because the appealed order is not reviewable by direct appeal, we grant appellee's motion and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

JUDGMENT

In accordance with this Court's opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee RANDY NEAL recover his costs of this appeal from appellant RYAN LOUDERMILK.


Summaries of

Loudermilk v. Neal

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Dec 27, 2024
No. 05-24-01088-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 27, 2024)
Case details for

Loudermilk v. Neal

Case Details

Full title:RYAN LOUDERMILK, Appellant v. RANDY NEAL, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas

Date published: Dec 27, 2024

Citations

No. 05-24-01088-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 27, 2024)