Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
John Stritzinger, Appellant v. Katherine Wright, Appellee
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
The above-referenced causes each arise from the same district court cause, Cause No. D-1-FM-04-004690, a suit affecting the parent-child relationship between John S. Stritzinger, III; his ex-wife Katherine Wright; and three children of their marriage. To date, Stritzinger, who is pro se, has filed at least five separate notices of appeal complaining of seven different district court orders:
Appellate Cause No. District Court Order Challenged03-10-00235-CV January 1, 2009, “Final Order in Suit Affecting Parent-Child Relationship” 03-10-00455-CV January 20, 2009, “Addendum to [January 1, 2009] Final Order in Suit Affecting Parent-Child Relationship” 03-10-00456-CV January 29, 2010, “Order Holding Respondent in Contempt, Suspending Commitment, And Order for Sanctions”03-10-00457-CV June 9, 2010, “Order of Contempt to Coerce Compliance”
June 9, 2010, “Order of Contempt for Violations of Court Order”03-10-00458-CV July 9, 2010, “Order Granting Katherine Wright's Motion to Quash and for Protective Order”
July 21, 2010, “Order Requiring John Stritzinger to Seek Court Approval Prior to Requesting Issuance of a Subpoena”
Now pending in these appellate causes are several motions. Stritzinger has filed an unopposed motion to consolidate all five causes to the extent of having a single appellate record. He has also filed unopposed motions to consolidate Cause Nos. 03-10-00456-CV, -00457, and -00458 for purposes of briefing. Wright has moved to dismiss Stritzinger's two appeals from contempt orders, Cause Nos. 03-10-00456-CV and -00457, for want of subject-matter jurisdiction. Stritzinger has filed a response in opposition to each dismissal motion.
Because they concern the same final order, we consolidate Cause Nos. 03-10-00235-CV and -00455 for all purposes. The records filed in Cause No. 03-10-00235-CV shall be transferred to Cause No. 03-10-00455-CV. The consolidated causes will proceed under the style of Cause No. 03-10-00455-CV. Cause No. 03-10-00235-CV is dismissed.
Because we lack subject-matter jurisdiction over Stritzinger's attempted appeals from contempt orders, see Ex parte Williams, 690 S.W.2d 243, 243 n.1 (Tex.1985); Metzger v. Sebek, 892 S.W.2d 20, 54-55 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, writ denied), we grant Wright's motions and dismiss Cause Nos. 03-10-00456-CV and -00457 for want of jurisdiction. In light of these dismissals, we dismiss as moot Stritzinger's motions to consolidate Cause Nos. 03-10-00456-CV, -00457, and -00458 for briefing purposes.
We grant Stritzinger's motion to consolidate the five causes for appellate record purposes to the extent that the parties in Cause No. 03-10-00458-CV may rely upon the appellate record in the consolidated Cause No. 03-10-00455-CV. We otherwise dismiss that motion as moot.
Dismissed
Bob Pemberton, Justice
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: NO. 03-10-00235-CV
Decided: September 29, 2010
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)