i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-08-00069-CV Charles G. RICHARDSON, Appellant v. Ralph DAVIS, Appellee From the 63rd Judicial District Court, Edwards County, Texas Trial Court No. 3626 Honorable Thomas F. Lee, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice Delivered and Filed: March 11, 2009 DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION Appellant is seeking to appeal a Judgment of Contempt. This court does not have jurisdiction to review contempt orders by direct appeal. Norman v. Norman, 692 S.W.2d 655, 655 (Tex. 1985).

Contempt orders may only be reviewed by an application for a writ of habeas corpus, if the contemnor has been confined, or by a petition for a writ of mandamus, if the contemnor has not been confined. See Rosser v. Squier, 902 S.W.2d 962, 962 (Tex. 1995); Ex parte Williams, 690 S.W.2d 243, 243 (Tex. 1985).

04-08-00069-CV On February 12, 2009, we ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant responded and concurred that a petition for writ of mandamus would be the proper means to challenge the trial court’s judgment. Appellant concludes, “If the Court finds that it cannot consider this appeal because it lacks jurisdiction to do so, then Appellant respectfully requests that he be permitted to promptly pursue a petition for writ of mandamus without being prejudiced because of the amount of time that has passed between the trial court’s order and the filing of the petition of writ of mandamus, as any mistake in this regard was the mistake of counsel, not Appellant.” Because we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal, it is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. We agree, however, that the delay occasioned by the pendency of this appeal should not preclude appellant from seeking mandamus relief. Costs of the appeal are taxed against appellant.

PER CURIAM

-2-