## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 20 - 00064 - CV No. 07 - 20 - 00065 - CV IN THE INTEREST OF J.B., A CHILD IN THE INTEREST OF K.B., A CHILD On Appeal from the County Court at Law No . 1

Randall County, Texas Trial Court No s . 74,140 - L1 & 74,142 - L1 , Honorable David L. Gleason , Presiding 

### April 9 , 2020 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before PIRTLE and PARKER and DOSS, JJ. Appellants, Mother 1 and maternal Grandparents, appeal from two trial court order s terminating Mother’s parental rights to her child ren , J.B. and K.B. , and appointing the Department of Family and Protective Services as permanent managing conservator of the children. 2 On March 17, 2020, the trial court granted Grandparents’ motion s for new

1 To protect the privacy of the parties involved, we will refer to the appellant s as “Mother” and “Grandparents” and to the child ren by their initials . See T EX . F AM . C ODE A NN . § 109.002(d) (West Supp. 2019); T EX . R. A PP . P. 9.8(b) (2)
.

2 Grandparents filed a petition in intervention in both causes seeking conservatorship of the children . The Department sought to terminate the parental rights of the father of J.B. in cause 74,140 - L1 . However, th e action was severed prior to trial. T he trial court terminated the parental rights of the father of K.B. in cause 74,142 - L1 , but he did not appeal.2

trial on the issue of permanent conservatorship in each cause . We now dismiss the appeal s for want of jurisdiction. Generally, appellate courts only have jurisdiction over final judgments. Lehmann v. Har - Con Corp ., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). A judgment is final for purposes of appeal if it disposes of all pending parties and claims. Id. Appellate courts have jurisdiction to consider immediate appeal s from interlocutory orders only if a statute explicitly provides appellate jurisdicti on. Stary v. DeBord , 967 S.W.2d 352, 352 - 53 (Tex. 1998) (per curiam)
. When the trial court granted Grandparents’ motions for new trial , the orders of termination no longer disposed of the issue of permanent conservatorship of the children
. Therefore , th e orders are not final. In re J.S.A. - S ., No. 14 - 13 - 00946 - CV, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 13992, at * 1 - 2 (Tex. App.
— Houston [14th Dist.] Nov. 14, 201 3 , no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op.) ( holding that a termination order was no t final after the trial court grant ed a new trial as to permanent conservatorship)
. And, we have found no statutory authority granting an immediate appeal from such interlocutory order s . See T EX . F AM . C ODE A NN . § 109.002(a), (b) (allowing appeal only from a final order). By letter s of March 24, 2020 , we notified appellants that it did not appear we had jurisdiction over the appeals because the trial court granted new trial s as to conservatorship of the children . We directed appellants to show grounds for continuin g the appeals by April 3, 2020, or we would dismiss them for want of jurisdiction. Appellants did not respond to our letter s .3

Because there is no final judgment in these cases, we dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction. 3 T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.3(a). Per Curiam

3 On March 23, 2020, Grandparents filed motion s to voluntarily dismiss the appeal s p ursuant to Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1. Those motions are rendered moot.