Narrative Opinion Summary
In this appellate case, the appellant challenges a divorce decree from the 53rd Judicial District Court of Travis County, which designated the opposing party as the sole managing conservator of their children. The appellant argued procedural mishandlings, specifically the trial court's failure to rule on his motion for continuance and inadequate representation by his attorney. However, the appellate court, adhering to the Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 33.1(a), emphasized its jurisdiction to review only trial court errors, not those attributed to legal counsel. Due to the absence of a motion for continuance in the record and the lack of a reporter’s transcript, the court could not substantiate the appellant’s claims. Consequently, the appellate court overruled both of the appellant's arguments, affirming the trial court's original ruling. The decision was rendered on November 18, 1999, with Chief Justice Marilyn Aboussie presiding, alongside Justices B. A. Smith and Yeakel.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appointment of Sole Managing Conservatorsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The trial court's decision to appoint one parent as the sole managing conservator was upheld.
Reasoning: Abraham Galvan appeals the divorce decree from the 53rd Judicial District Court of Travis County, which appointed Joanna Galvan as the sole managing conservator of their three children.
Overruling of Appellant's Issuessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: All issues raised by the appellant were dismissed due to lack of evidence and procedural compliance.
Reasoning: Consequently, both of Abraham's issues are overruled, and the trial court's decree is affirmed.
Requirement of Record for Appellate Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The absence of a formal record or ruling precludes the appellate court from reviewing specific claims.
Reasoning: The court found no evidence in the record of a motion for continuance or any ruling on it, thus precluding review of Abraham's claims.
Review of Trial Court Errorssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court focuses on errors made by the trial court, not on counsel effectiveness.
Reasoning: The appellate court clarifies that it reviews only for errors made by the trial court, not by counsel, as per Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 33.1(a).