Motions 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. 43370

ORDER

The 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 contains an order denying appellant’s plea, signed by the trial court on 

May 27, 2021.

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, 2021, and on August 10, 2021, 

appellee filed a sur-reply. In its brief, appellant does not challenge the trial court’s
2

denial of its plea to the jurisdiction. Rather, appellant complains the trial court is 

barred from imposing sanctions against it and violates the separation of powers 

doctrine by sanctioning appellant. There is no sanctions order in the record before 

this court. 

On February 3, 2022, appellant filed two motions: (1) a motion to dismiss 

this appeal as moot; and (2) a motion to issue temporary orders. The motion to 

dismiss contends 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 the pending interlocutory appeal and 

that the trial court impliedly denied the sanctions motion against the OAG.” The 

motion for temporary orders requests this court find the trial court violated the 

statutory stay provided by section 51.014(b) of the Texas Civil Practice and 

Remedies Code by issuing a final order. The motion further requests we hold “the 

trial court denied the sanctions motion at issue in this interlocutory appeal in its 

final order and rendered the interlocutory appeal as moot.” Alternatively, appellant 

requests we exercise our jurisdiction to issue temporary orders to preserve its right 

until disposition of the appeal. There is no agreed order in the appellate record and 

no notice of appeal from such an order. 

This interlocutory appeal is permissible under section 51.014(8) as an appeal 

from the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction. Appellant raises no issues complaining 

of that order. Accordingly, none of appellant’s issues are properly before this court. 

Because appellant makes no challenge to the order on appeal, the appeal is moot.

See Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc. v. Panda Power Generation 

Infrastructure Fund, LLC, 619 S.W.3d 628, 634-35 (Tex. 2021).
3

On March 17, 2022, the Court will consider dismissal of the appeal on its 

own motion for want of jurisdiction. The appeal will be dismissed unless any party 

files a response on or before March 15, 2022, showing meritorious grounds for 

continuing the appeal.

The issues raised in appellant’s motions in no way concern the denial of the 

plea to the jurisdiction and seek an advisory opinion on an order not before this 

court. See Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc, 619 S.W.3d at 634-35. The 

motions are denied.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Poissant, and Wilson.