Legal Opinion

In the Interest of E.K.N.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided July 13, 2000No. 2-00-013-CVPublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DIXON W. HOLMAN, Justice.

This is a restricted appeal taken from a no-answer default judgment against Appellant Kurt Neswald arising out of a suit affecting the parent-child relationship (SAPCR). Because Appellant failed to demonstrate error on the face of the record, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

Appellant and Appellee Denise M. Page lived in California and began seeing one another in October 1994. The couple discovered in December that Appellee was pregnant. They moved in together and started saving for a house. The couple eventually bought a home and moved into it…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Norman Communications v. Texas Eastman Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Gunn v. CavanaughTexas Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Barker CATV Construction, Inc. v. Ampro, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1999
  4. Texaco, Inc. v. Central Power & Light Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Phillips v. BeaberTexas Supreme Court · 1999

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. TAC Americas, Inc. v. Boothe, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2002
  2. Campbell v. Fincher, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2002
  3. In Re Estate of Head, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2005
  4. Starks v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2004
  5. Mandel v. Lewisville Independent School District, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2014

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API