Court Opinion

ID: 9401430
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-13 10:09:02.451622+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:52.745769
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                      NO. 03-23-00146-CV

                                         J. G., Appellant

                                                 v.

               Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

              FROM THE 146TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY
   NO. 22DFAM329703, THE HONORABLE JACK WELDON JONES, JUDGE PRESIDING

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

               In this suit affecting the parent-child relationship filed by the Texas Department

of Family and Protective Services (the Department), appellant J.G., the father of one of the two

children involved in the suit, filed a notice of appeal from the district court’s de novo order

affirming a ruling by the associate judge that returned J.G.’s child to the child’s mother on a

monitored basis, dismissed the Department as temporary managing conservator of that child, and

continued the Department as temporary managing conservator of the other child involved in the

suit. On May 23, 2023, the Clerk of this Court sent a letter to J.G.’s counsel informing her that it

appeared this Court lacked jurisdiction over this matter because the district court’s order does

not appear to be a final, appealable order and requesting that she file a response no later than

June 2, 2023. As of today’s date, we have received no response from counsel.

               In suits affecting the parent-child relationship, this Court has appellate jurisdiction

over final orders. See Tex. Fam. Code § 109.002(b). An order is final “when it disposes of all
issues and all parties in the record.” In re R.R.K., 590 S.W.3d 535, 540 (Tex. 2019) (citing

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001)). The order from which Father

seeks to appeal does not dispose of all issues and parties in this suit, which remained pending at

the time of the order. Consequently, the order is not final, and we lack jurisdiction to review it.

See id. at 544; In re J.D., 304 S.W.3d 522, 524-27 (Tex. App.—Waco 2009, no pet.); see also

J.C. v. Texas Dep’t of Fam. & Protective Servs., No. 03-22-00395-CV, 2022 WL 3691683, at *1

(Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 26, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op.); In re M.A.M., No. 07-19-00173-CV,

2019 WL 3486731, at *1 (Tex. App.—Amarillo July 31, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.).

               We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

                                             __________________________________________
                                             Gisela D. Triana, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Theofanis

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: June 9, 2023

                                                2