Court Opinion

ID: 9838123
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-05 13:09:05.455472+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:34:21.736498
License: Public Domain

Fourth Court of Appeals
                                     San Antonio, Texas
                                 MEMORANDUM OPINION
                                        No. 04-23-00652-CV

                               IN THE INTEREST OF R. P., a Child

                     From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
                                  Trial Court No. 2022-PA-01371
                              Honorable Raul Perales, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting:          Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
                  Beth Watkins, Justice
                  Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 30, 2023

MOTION TO ABATE DENIED; DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

           On July 5, 2023, appellant filed a notice of appeal challenging an order of termination

signed on June 29, 2023 by an associate judge. Appellant then filed a “Motion To Abate

Accelerated Time Table,” requesting we abate the accelerated timelines because she timely filed

a request for a de novo hearing before the referring court pursuant to section 201.015 of the Texas

Family Code. Appellant further stated the trial court scheduled the de novo hearing for July 20,

2023. We then received the clerk’s record, which confirmed appellant’s request for a de novo

hearing was timely filed.

           Generally, “an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment.” Lehmann v. Har-Con

Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). An associate judge does not have the power to render a

final judgment outside the context of certain limited exceptions listed in section 201.007 of the
                                                                                      04-23-00652-CV

Texas Family Code. TEX. FAM. CODE § 201.007(a)(14) (listing orders associate judges may render

and sign); In re C.R-A.A., No. 04-16-00587-CV, 2016 WL 6238237, at *1 (Tex. App.—San

Antonio Oct. 26, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.). Thus, “[u]nless authorized by section 201.007, an

associate judge’s proposed order or recommendation has only temporary effect, pending appeal to

the referring trial court.” C.R-A.A., 2016 WL 6238237, at *1; see TEX. FAM. CODE § 201.013(a);

Chacon v. Chacon, 222 S.W.3d 909, 913 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2007, no pet.) (“An associate

judge’s orders or recommendations have only temporary effect, pending appeal to a referring

court.”). In other words, when a party timely files a request for a de novo hearing before the

referring court, an associate judge’s order is not a final, appealable order. C.R-A.A., 2016 WL

6238237, at *1.

       Here, none of the exceptions listed in section 201.007 apply, and appellant timely filed a

request for a de novo hearing. See TEX. FAM. CODE § 201.007(a)(14). As a result, the associate

judge’s order is interlocutory and not a final, appealable order. See C.R-A.A., 2016 WL 6238237,

at *1; see also TEX. FAM. CODE § 201.013(a); Chacon, 222 S.W.3d at 913. We therefore ordered

appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3. Appellant filed a response, stating the referring court held a de novo

hearing, and a proposed order has been presented to the referring court.

       Accordingly, because appellant’s response confirms the June 29, 2023 order of termination

is not a final, appealable order, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See In re J.A.D.L.,

No. 04-18-00141-CV, 2018 WL 1936866, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Apr. 25, 2018, no pet.)

(mem. op.) (concluding order terminating parents’ parental rights was interlocutory after father

timely filed request for de novo hearing); C.R-A.A., 2016 WL 6238237, at *1 (dismissing appeal

for lack of jurisdiction after concluding order of termination was interlocutory because party timely

requested de novo hearing); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Appellant’s motion to abate the

                                                 -2-
                                                                                      04-23-00652-CV

appeal is denied. Should appellant seek to appeal the referring trial court’s final judgment or order

adopting the associate judge’s order of termination, she must file a new notice of appeal. See C.R-

A.A., 2016 WL 6238237, at *1 (“Following rendition of a final judgment or order adopting the

associate judge’s recommendation, any appealing party must file a new notice of appeal.”); see

also TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b) (stating notice of appeal in accelerated appeal must be filed within

twenty days after challenged judgment or order).

                                                  PER CURIAM

                                                -3-