Paula Morris v. City of Midland, Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 9, 2025
• Docket: 11-25-00265-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion filed October 9, 2025

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals ___________

No. 11-25-00265-CV ___________

PAULA MORRIS, Appellant V. CITY OF MIDLAND, TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 385th District Court Midland County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CV57069

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Paula Morris, filed a pro se notice of appeal from the trial court’s fourth order finding her in contempt for violating its final judgment for a permanent injunction against her based on her repeated violations of municipal ordinances. See Morris v. City of Midland, No. 11-22-00209-CV, 2023 WL 8262750, *1, *10 (Tex. App.—Eastland Nov. 30, 2023, pet. denied) (mem. op.) (affirming the trial court’s judgments in the same trial court cause number). We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. In its fourth contempt order, the trial court granted Appellee’s motion to show cause due to Morris’s continued failure to comply with the final judgment, found her in contempt, imposed a $500 fine for each violation, ordered her to remove the prohibited items from her property to come into compliance with the judgment, and, if she failed to do so, instructed the sheriff or an officer or agent of Appellee, the City of Midland, to enter upon the property to remove the items that violate the judgment. When this appeal was docketed, we informed Morris by letter that it appeared that the trial court’s order was not appealable. We requested Morris to respond and show grounds to continue the appeal, and we notified her that the appeal was subject to dismissal. Morris did not file a response. As we informed Morris in Morris v. City of Midland, we lack jurisdiction in a direct appeal to review a contempt order that does not impose confinement. Id. at *9 (citing Tex. Animal Health Comm’n v. Nunley, 647 S.W.2d 951, 952 (Tex. 1983)). Accordingly, Appellant’s notice of appeal does not invoke this court’s appellate jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

JOHN M. BAILEY CHIEF JUSTICE

October 9, 2025 Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter, J., and Wright, S.C.J. 1

Williams, J., not participating.

1 Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment. 2