From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Craft v. Craft

Supreme Court of Texas
May 2, 1979
580 S.W.2d 814 (Tex. 1979)

Opinion

No. B-8333.

May 2, 1979.

Appeal from the District Court No. 303, Dallas County, Williams, J.

Berman, Fichtner Mitchell, Jay S. Fichtner and Beverly A. Lebowitz, Dallas, for petitioner.

Ray, Anderson, Shields, Trotti Hemphill, Charles O. Shields, Dallas, for respondent.


Pursuant to Tex. Family Code, Section 11.11, the district court appointed Jerry David Craft temporary managing conservator of his children until final determination of a pending motion to modify the managing conservatorship of the children. The Court of Civil Appeals ruled that the temporary order is not appealable and dismissed the appeal. 579 S.W.2d 506. Mary Sue Craft has filed an application for writ of error to this Court which is refused. Tex.R.Civ.P. 483.

Section 11.11(a) temporary orders are governed procedurally by Section 11.11(b). There is, however, no provision in Section 11.11, or otherwise in the Family Code, for an appeal therefrom. Section 11.19 expressly governs appeals from orders entered in suits affecting the parent-child relationship but is silent with respect to Section 11.11 orders. We agree with the ruling that such orders are not appealable.

We note our refusal, no reversible error, of the application for writ of error in In the Interest of Stuart, 544 S.W.2d 821 (Tex.Civ.App. 1976, writ ref'd n. r. e.). However, the ruling of the Court of Civil Appeals that a temporary order under Section 11.11 is appealable was not assigned as error in the application for writ of error in that case.


Summaries of

Craft v. Craft

Supreme Court of Texas
May 2, 1979
580 S.W.2d 814 (Tex. 1979)
Case details for

Craft v. Craft

Case Details

Full title:Mary Sue CRAFT, Petitioner, v. Jerry David CRAFT, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of Texas

Date published: May 2, 1979

Citations

580 S.W.2d 814 (Tex. 1979)

Citing Cases

Querner v. Querner

Likewise, the trial court may enter a non-injunctive temporary order as it was able to do prior to the 1981…

Sparr v. Sparr

Each of these orders are clearly interlocutory and as such are not subject to be appealed. Except for…