Motion s Denied and Order filed March 1 , 2022 .

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14
- 21
- 00274
- CV

____________ IN THE INTEREST OF E.M.S . On Appeal from the 300th District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 4 33 7 0


### ORDER
Th e Office of the Attorney General of Texas ( “ OAG ” ) filed a notice of interlocutory appeal pursuant to section 51 .014(a)(8) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code from the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction. The record before this court con tains an order denying appellant ’ s plea , signed by the trial court on May 27, 202 1. On June 17, 2021, appellant ’ s brief was filed. Appellee ’ s brief was filed July 29, 2021. Appellant filed a reply brief on August 2 , 202 1 , and on August 10, 2021, appell ee f iled a sur

- reply

. In its brief, appellant do es not challenge the trial court ’ s2

denial of its p lea to the jurisdiction

. Rather , appellant comp l ains the trial court is barred from imposi ng sanctions against it and violates the separation of powers do ctri ne b y sanctioning appellant. There is no sanct ions order in the record before this court. On February 3, 20 22, a ppellan t filed two motions : (1) a motion to di s miss this appeal as moot ; and (2) a motion to issue tempo rary orders

. The motion to dismiss co nten ds the interlocutory appeal is moot because a final agreed order resolved the sanctions motion in favor of appellant. The motion further requests we hold “ the agreed order is final for purposes of th e pending interlocutory appeal and that the trial cou rt i mpliedly denied the sanctions mot ion against the OAG. ” The motion for temporary orders request s this court find the trial court violated the statutory stay provided by s e c t i o n 5 1

. 0 1 4 ( b ) o f t h e T exas Civil Practice and Re medies Code by iss uing a f i nal o rder

. The motion further r equests we hold “ the trial court denied the sanctions motion at issue in this interlocutor y appeal in its final order and rendered the interlocutory appeal as moot. ” Alt ernatively, appellant request s we exercise our jurisdiction t o is sue tempo rary orders to preserve its right until disposition of the appe al. There is no agreed order in the appellate record and

no notice of appeal from such an order.
T his interloc utory appeal is permissible under section 51.014(8) as an appeal f rom the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction. Appellant raises no issues com plaining of th at order

. Accordingly , none of appe ll ant ’ s issues are properly before this court

. Because a ppellant mak es no challenge to the order on appeal, the appeal is m oot. See El ectr ic Reliability Co un cil of Texas, Inc. v. Panda Po wer Generation I n frastructure Fund

, LL C , 619 S.W.3d 628, 634

- 35 (Tex. 2021).3

O n March 1 7 , 2022 , the Court will consider dismissal of the appeal on its own motion for want of juris diction. The appeal wil l be dismissed unless any party files a re sponse on or before March 15 , 2022 , showing meritorious grounds for continuing the appeal.
T he issues raised in appellant ’ s motion s in no way concern the denial of the plea to the jurisdictio n and seek an advisory o pin i on on an order not before this court

. See Electric Reliability Co un cil of Texas, Inc , 619 S.W.3d at 634

- 35

. The motions are denied.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Poissant, and Wilson.