in the Interest of R.R., a Child ( 2021 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-21-00107-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF R.R., a Child
From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2019-PA-01828
Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Beth Watkins, Justice
Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Delivered and Filed: May 5, 2021
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
On March 18, 2021, appellants filed a notice of appeal and a motion for extension of time
to file their notice of appeal, stating their intent to appeal a “Memorandum of Order” terminating
their parental rights that was signed on February 12, 2021. The clerk’s record was filed on March
30, 2021. Although it did not contain a traditional final order, it included a “Memorandum of
Associate Judge’s Order” that “makes all necessary findings for termination required by law” and
indicates “[a]ll parties have been notified of the contents of this ruling and right of appeal.” The
clerk’s record also indicated the Memorandum of Associate Judge’s Order was signed after a trial
on the merits. See Ne. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893, 897–98 (Tex. 1966).
In a parental termination appeal, an associate judge’s memorandum report and order can
constitute a final, appealable order if it is signed after a trial on the merits, contains the findings
04-21-00107-CV
necessary for termination, and indicates the parties were notified of the ruling and their right to
appeal. In re A.W., 384 S.W.3d 872, 873–74 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012, no pet.). However,
if a memorandum order does not clearly, unequivocally, and unmistakably indicate it is a final
judgment, we must “examine the record to determine the trial court’s intent.” In re R.R.K., 590
S.W.3d 535, 543–44 (Tex. 2019). Here, while the Memorandum of Associate Judge’s Order
appears to satisfy the requirements established by this court in In re A.W., it also states it “is not
the final order, just a memorandum of final order,” and sets a “motion to enter” for a later date.
Moreover, the clerk’s record shows the trial court held a hearing on the motion to enter a final
order on February 26, 2021, fourteen days after the signing of the Memorandum of Associate
Judge’s Order. Finally, the clerk’s record shows that on March 1, 2021, appellants filed objections
to a proposed final order terminating their parental rights. Although the clerk’s record does not
contain the proposed order at issue, appellants’ motion objected to several paragraphs that do not
appear in the February 12, 2021 Memorandum of Associate Judge’s Order.
After reviewing the clerk’s record, we concluded that the February 12, 2021
“Memorandum of Associate Judge’s Order” was not a final order. See In re R.R.K., 590 S.W.3d at
544 (concluding memorandum order was not final because record indicated neither trial court nor
parties intended it to be final). Because “an appeal may be prosecuted only from a final judgment”
and the record appeared to indicate no final order had been entered in the underlying case, we
ordered appellants to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
See Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d at 895.
On April 26, 2021, appellants filed a response to our order confirming that no final order
has been entered. Because the record does not contain a final order of termination, we have no
-2-
04-21-00107-CV
choice but to dismiss this appeal. 1 Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
PER CURIAM
1
While appellants’ response unequivocally states that no final order has been entered below, they ask this court to
dismiss the underlying cause and order R.R. returned to their custody, citing the language formerly contained in Texas
Family Code section 263.401, which required dismissal if the trial court did not render a final order or grant an
extension within one year. We lack jurisdiction to grant such relief in the absence of a final order. See Aldridge, 400
S.W.2d at 895; In re L.J.R., No. 04-18-00382-CV, 2018 WL 3369937, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio July 11, 2018,
no pet.) (mem. op.). However, this dismissal does not prevent appellants from later pursuing a timely appeal from a
final judgment in this case.
-3-