in the Interest of V.A., L.A., and J.A, Children ( 2010 )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-10-00553-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF V.A., L.A., and J.A, Children
From the 81st Judicial District Court, Atascosa County, Texas
Trial Court No. 10-06-0413-CVA
The Honorable Cathy O. Morris, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Rebecca Simmons, Justice
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: November 17, 2010
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
The trial court’s order awarded temporary managing conservatorship of V.A., L.A., and
J.A. to the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. Generally, only final judgments
are appealable. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Interlocutory
orders are appealable only if permitted by statute. Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53
S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001). No statute grants an interlocutory appeal of a temporary order
such as the one at issue here. In fact, the Texas Family Code specifically precludes the
interlocutory appeal of temporary orders in suits affecting the parent-child relationship. TEX.
FAM. CODE ANN. § 105.001(e) (West 2009); see In re N.J.G., 980 S.W.2d 764, 766-67 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio 1998, no pet.) (holding that because question of permanent conservatorship
04-10-00553-CV
remained unresolved by order denying motion to terminate temporary conservatorship, that order
was interlocutory and not appealable).
Because it appeared that this court did not have jurisdiction over this appeal, we ordered
appellant to show cause in writing, by September 24, 2010, why this appeal should not be
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Norman v. Norman, 692 S.W.2d 655, 655 (Tex. 1985). We
have received no response to our show cause order.
This appeal is, therefore, dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
PER CURIAM
-2-