Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

692 S.W.2d 655

28 Tex.Sup.Ct.J. 539

Norman v. Norman

Texas Supreme Court

Decided July 3, 1985

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1985-07-03

Relies on McCauley v. Consolidated Underwriters · Wagner v. Warnasch · Wagner v. Warnasch

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1985-07-03

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Sutherland v. Cobern (1992), Chenault v. Banks (2009)

28 state decisions

1101985199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1 This is an attempted appeal from an order finding an alleged contemnor not to be in contempt of court. The managing conservator, Marsha D. Norman, began the present proceeding by filing a motion for contempt complaining that the possessory conservator, William E. Norman, was in arrears in his child support obligation. William filed a reply in which he pleaded as an affirmative defense that Marsha had voluntarily relinquished possession of their son to him and that he was supporting the child. See TEX.FAM.CODE § 14.09(e) (Vernon Supp.1985).

¶2 The trial court found William to be in arrears, but did not hold him in contempt because it found William had, in good faith, erroneously relied on § 14.09(e). The court of appeals, en banc, affirmed the judgment concluding that § 14.09(e) was no defense under the present facts because Marsha had not voluntarily relinquished possession of the child to William. Three judges dissented. 683 S.W.2d 548.

¶3 The court of appeals has erred in assuming jurisdiction over the present matter because an order finding a party not in contempt is not a final, appealable judgment. Wagner v. Warnasch, 156 Tex. 335, 295 S.W.2d 890 (1956). This court has jurisdiction to vacate the judgment of the court of appeals when it erroneously exercises its jurisdiction. Baker v. Hansen, 679 S.W.2d 480 (Tex.1984); McCauley v. Consolidated Underwriters, 157 Tex. 475, 304 S.W.2d 265 (1957).

¶4 Pursuant to TEX.R.CIV.P. 483, we grant the application for writ of error, and without hearing oral argument, reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and dismiss the appeal.

/692/sw2d/655 · .json · Public domain