in the Interest of K.B., a Child ( 2020 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
No. 07-20-00064-CV
No. 07-20-00065-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF J.B., A CHILD
IN THE INTEREST OF K.B., A CHILD
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1
Randall County, Texas
Trial Court Nos. 74,140-L1 & 74,142-L1, Honorable David L. Gleason, Presiding
April 9, 2020
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before PIRTLE and PARKER and DOSS, JJ.
Appellants, Mother1 and maternal Grandparents, appeal from two trial court orders
terminating Mother’s parental rights to her children, J.B. and K.B., and appointing the
Department of Family and Protective Services as permanent managing conservator of
the children.2 On March 17, 2020, the trial court granted Grandparents’ motions for new
1To protect the privacy of the parties involved, we will refer to the appellants as “Mother” and
“Grandparents” and to the children by their initials. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 109.002(d) (West Supp.
2019); TEX. R. APP. P. 9.8(b)(2).
2 Grandparents filed a petition in intervention in both causes seeking conservatorship of the
children. The Department sought to terminate the parental rights of the father of J.B. in cause 74,140-L1.
However, the action was severed prior to trial. The trial court terminated the parental rights of the father of
K.B. in cause 74,142-L1, but he did not appeal.
trial on the issue of permanent conservatorship in each cause. We now dismiss the
appeals for want of jurisdiction.
Generally, appellate courts only have jurisdiction over final judgments. Lehmann
v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). A judgment is final for purposes of
appeal if it disposes of all pending parties and claims. Id. Appellate courts have
jurisdiction to consider immediate appeals from interlocutory orders only if a statute
explicitly provides appellate jurisdiction. Stary v. DeBord, 967 S.W.2d 352, 352-53 (Tex.
1998) (per curiam).
When the trial court granted Grandparents’ motions for new trial, the orders of
termination no longer disposed of the issue of permanent conservatorship of the children.
Therefore, the orders are not final. In re J.S.A.-S., No. 14-13-00946-CV, 2013 Tex. App.
LEXIS 13992, at *1-2 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Nov. 14, 2013, no pet.) (per
curiam) (mem. op.) (holding that a termination order was not final after the trial court
granted a new trial as to permanent conservatorship). And, we have found no statutory
authority granting an immediate appeal from such interlocutory orders. See TEX. FAM.
CODE ANN. § 109.002(a), (b) (allowing appeal only from a final order).
By letters of March 24, 2020, we notified appellants that it did not appear we had
jurisdiction over the appeals because the trial court granted new trials as to
conservatorship of the children. We directed appellants to show grounds for continuing
the appeals by April 3, 2020, or we would dismiss them for want of jurisdiction. Appellants
did not respond to our letters.
2
Because there is no final judgment in these cases, we dismiss the appeals for want
of jurisdiction.3 TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
Per Curiam
3 On March 23, 2020, Grandparents filed motions to voluntarily dismiss the appeals pursuant to
Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1. Those motions are rendered moot.
3