### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-0 7 -00 099 -CV

In the Interestof E . N. C.

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF B ELL COUNTY , 169TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 2106 53- C , HO NORAB LE GORDO N G. ADAMS, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N
Th e le g isl a tur e ha s p ro vid e d, wi th a pa rt ic ula r e mph a sis on

su its a ff e c tin g pa re ntchild relationships, t hat “[i] t is the policy of this state t o en coura g e the pe ace able r esolution of disputes . . . throug h voluntary settlement pro ce d u re s.” Tex. Civ. P rac . & Re m. Code Ann. § 154.002 (West 2005). I n light of this leg islative policy , we be lieve that this case is appropriate for alternative dispute resolution by mediation, and we, there fore , abate the appea l a nd ref er the matter for mediation. See id. §§ 154.021, .023(a) (West 2005).

The re fer ral is not mandatory , and the pa rties ar e fre e to re

ject the r ecommendation. See id. § 1 54 .0 22 (We st 2 00 5) (a llo wi ngpa rt y to f ile ob je c tio n to re fe rr a l to a ltern ati ve dis pu te
re so lut ion ). I f t

he pa rt ie s d o n ot w ish to p art ic ipate in m e diatio n, the y are ins tr uc te d to c omm

un ic a te that fac t to this Court within 10 day s. See id. Howeve r, should the parties ag ree to pa rticipate in a mediation, Mr. Robert B . Luther ha s ag ree d to se rve as a pro bono mediator at his office in Austin, Texas, and we f

ind that he is qualified to ac t in that capac ity
.2 I f t he pa rt ie s are a me na

ble to me diatio n, the y

are ins tr uc te d to c on ta c t Mr . L

uth e r t o establish a date for the me diation, provided that the date shall occur no later than 45 day s after the date of this order. Af

ter mediation, Mr. Luther is instruc ted to inf orm this Court i n writing when the mediation is completed and w hether a settlement wa s rea ched. Mr. Luther is a lso instruc ted to send
a c op y of the re po rt

to e a c h o f t

he pa rt ie s. I f t he pa rt ie s c omm

un ic a te to t

his Court that th e y do no t w ant t o part ici pate in mediation or if Mr. L

uther infor

ms this C ourt that a settlement was not re ache d throug h mediation, then the appe al will be abate d and sent back to the district c ourt. After the trial ended, the district court issued a

final orde r appointing Ker ry and L isa Daun as manag ing c onservators for E.N .C. The order also stated that Tammie Carr wa s no t entitled to the presumption that a biologic al par ent be
a pp oin te d ma

na g ingc on se rv a tor

be c a us e the re is a

“ his tor y of fa mil y vio le nc e inv olv ingthe pa re nts of the c hild.” See Tex. Fam. Code Ann
. § 153.131(b) ( West 2002). Alternatively , the orde r specifie d that even if Carr was entitled to the presumption, Carr should not be appointed mana g ing
conser vator be cause the appointment “would sig nificantly impair the child’s phy sical hea lth or emotional development.” See id. § 1 53 .1 31 (a ) (We st 200 2)
. Th e or de r ap po int e d Ca rr a s th e so le possessory

conser vator but did not awa

rd her any power s or impose any duties other than to inform the Dauns c oncer

ning a ny information re levant to E.N.C.’s we lfare and to inform the Da uns if she marrie s or lives with a reg istered sex off ender
. Fur

ther, despite naming Carr as t h e p o s s es sory
conser vator, the or der did not spec ify any visitation rights for Car

r other than listi ng two dates upon which Carr

could have supervised visitation. Carr reque sted that the district c ourt issue finding s of3

fac t and conc lusions of law supporting its order, see T ex . R. Civ. P . 296, but no findings or conclusions wer e eve r produc ed.

The a bsence of finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of l aw in the j udg ment preve nts us from conducting a m eaning ful revie w of the di strict court’s de cision. Acc ording ly , if the par ties do not desire to par

ticipate in mediation or cannot rea ch a se ttlement, we will issue a new order abating the appe al and se nding it b ac k t o the district court with instructions that the district court e nter finding s and conc lusions supporting its order.

David Pury ear , J ustice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Pury ear , and He nson Abated Filed: F ebrua

ry 22, 2008