COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Appellate case name: M.D.D. and R.R.D.v. Department of Family and Protective Services

Appellate case number: 01 - 12-00007-CV

Trial court case number: 2010-52475

Trial court: 310th District Court of Harris County, Texas

The special clerk’s record filed with this Court reflects that appellants each had appointed

attorneys ad litem, Douglas Ray York and Dan J. Spjut, in the trial court. The Texas Family

Code provides that an attorney appointed to serve as an attorney ad litem for a parent or an

alleged father continues to serve in that role until the suit is dismissed, appeals are exhausted, or

the attorney 1s relieved of the attorney’s duties or replaced by another attorney after a finding of

good cause. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 107.016 (West Supp. 2011). The final judgment provides

that the appointments made "do not conclude with the signing of this final judgment" and

continue until "all appeals, if any, have concluded." However, the notice of appeal in this case

was filed pro se, and no attorney has made an appearance in this appeal.

In addition, in a suit filed by a governmental entity in which termination of the parentchild relationship is requested, a parent who the court has determined is indigent for purposes of

appointment of an attomey ad litem is presumed to remmn indigent for the duration of the suit

and subsequent appeal. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. §107.013(e). Therefore, this Court requires a

supplemental clerk’s record containing all documents from the record below pertaining to any

claim of indigence made by either appellant at any point in the proceeding, any ruling the trial

court has made with respect to such claims, and all documents related to the appointment of the

attomeys ad litem in this matter, including all requests for counsel and orders appointing counsel.

Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the case to the trial court for a hearing at

which a representative of the Department of Family and Protective Services, appellants’

attorneys ad litem, Douglas Ray York and Dan J. Spjut, and appellants shall be present In person.
If either appellant is incarcerated, they may appear by closed video teleconference. 1 We direct

the trial court to make appropriate written findings of fact and conclusions of law and to execute

any necessary orders on these Issues:

(1) The Court shall determine whether appellants still wish to pursue this appeal; and if

SO,

(a) The Court shall determine

(i) whether appellants’ attorneys ad litem, Douglas Ray York and Dan J.

Spjut, have been relieved of their duties, and

(ii) if counsel have not been relieved of their duties, whether good cause exists

to remove counsel; and

(b) Upon finding either (i) or (ii), that Douglas Ray York and Dan J. Spjut have

been relieved of their duties or that good cause exists to relieve them of their

duties, the trial court shall issue a written order appointing new appellate counsel;

or

(c) If good cause does not exist to relieve one or both of appellants’ attorneys at

litem, Douglas Ray York and Dan J. Spjut, of their duties and counsel have not

been relieved of their duties, the trial court shall determine why said counsel have

failed to make an appearance an this appeal and shall direct counsel to make an

appearance an this appeal, including filing a conforming notice of appeal on

behalf of their client, within 10 days of the date of the hearing; and

(2) The trial court shall issue a written order directing the clerk to place all documents

from the record below pertaamng to any claim of indigence made by either appellant at

any point in the proceeding, any ruling the trial court has made with respect to such

claims, and all documents related to the appointment of the attorneys ad litem an this

matter, including all requests for counsel and orders appointing counsel, in a

supplemental clerk’s record to be filed with this Court within 10 days after the date of the

hearing.

The trial court shall have a court reporter, or court recorder, record the hearing and file

the reporter’s record with this Court no later than 30 days from the date of this order.

Additionally, the trial court’s findings and recommendations and any orders issued pursuant to

this hearing shall be included an a supplemental clerk’s record and filed with this Court no later

than 30 days from the date of this order. See TEx. R. Al, P. 34.5(c). If the hearing as

conducted by video teleconference, an electronic copy of the hearing shall be filed in this Court

no later than 30 days of the date of this order.

The appeal lS abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this Court’s active

docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this Court’s active docket when (1) the supplemental

1 Any such teleconference must use a closed-circuit video teleconferencang system that

provides for a simultaneous compressed full motion video and interactive communication

of image and sound between the trial court, appellants, and any attorneys representing the

Department or appellants. On request, appellants and their counsel shall be able to

communicate privately without being recorded or heard by the trial court or the attorney

representing the Department.
clerk’s record containing the trial court’s findings and recommendations and any orders issued

pursuant to the hearing, as well as all documents pertaining to indigence and the appointment of

attorneys ad litem, and (2) the reporter’s record of the hearing are filed in this Court.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:/s/Evelyn V. Keyes

El Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: August 2, 2012