in the Interest of L.G., a Child ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                  Fourth Court of Appeals
    San Antonio, Texas
    February 17, 2017
    No. 04-17-00073-CV
    IN THE INTEREST OF L.G., A CHILD,
    From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 2015PA02398
    Honorable Peter A. Sakai, Judge Presiding
    ORDER
    This is an attempted appeal from an order terminating parental rights. On October 20,
    2016, an associate judge signed an order terminating appellant’s parental rights. On October 31,
    2016, appellant filed a request for a de novo hearing. On January 27, 2017, the referring court
    signed a letter stating that the case was submitted for a de novo hearing. In this letter, the
    referring court ordered appellant’s parental rights terminated and directed the Texas Department
    of Protective and Family Services to draft a final decree. On February 7, 2017, appellant filed a
    notice of appeal.
    Section 201.015(a) of the Texas Family Code provides that a party may file a request for
    a de novo hearing to be conducted by the referring court; however, the written request must be
    filed “not later than the third working day after the party receives notice of the substance of the
    associate judge’s report as provided by Section 201.011.” TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 201.015(a)(1)
    (West Supp. 2016). Section 201.011 provides that “notice of the substance of the associate
    judge’s report may be given to the parties in open court, by an oral statement or a copy of the
    associate judges’ written report, including any proposed order.” 
    Id. § 201.011(c)(1)
    (West 2014).
    However, section 201.2041 provides that “[i]f a request for a de novo hearing before the
    referring court is not timely filed . . . the proposed order or judgment of the associate judge
    becomes the order or judgment of the referring court without ratification by the referring court.”
    
    Id. § 201.2041.
    Here, it appears that the appellant’s request for a de novo hearing was not timely filed.
    The termination order shows that it was signed by the associate judge on October 20, 2016.1 The
    order was approved by appellant’s trial counsel. Therefore, the record indicates that appellant
    received notice of the substance of the associate judge’s report at least by October 20, 2016. See
    In the Interest of M.P., No. 04-08-00881-CV, 
    2009 WL 2413694
    , at *1 (Tex. App.— 2009, no
    1
    We note that appellant’s request for a de novo hearing states that the associate judge’s termination order was signed
    on October 28, 2016, but the order and the docket sheet state that the order was signed on October 20, 2016.
    pet.) (providing that signature of appellant’s attorney on associate judge’s order established that
    appellant had notice of the order). However, appellant’s request for a de novo hearing was not
    filed until October 31, 2016, which is more than three working days after appellant received
    notice of the substance of the associate judge’s report. Therefore, appellant’s request for a de
    novo hearing appears to be untimely.
    If appellant’s request for a de novo hearing was untimely, the associate judge’s
    termination order became the judgment of the referring court and a final, appealable order. See
    TEX. FAM. CODE. ANN. § 201.011; M.P, 
    2009 WL 2413694
    , at *1. Appellant’s notice of appeal
    from the termination order was therefore due to be filed within twenty days after the associate
    judge’s order was signed, which would have been November 9, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P.
    26.1(b). Appellant’s notice of appeal was not filed until February 7, 2017.
    Absent a timely notice of appeal, this court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal.
    See In the Interest of A.P., No. 11-14-00278-CV, 
    2014 WL 6755631
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—
    Eastland 2014, no pet.) (dismissing parental termination appeal for lack of jurisdiction when
    notice of appeal was untimely).
    We, therefore, ORDER appellant to show cause in writing by March 3, 2017 why this
    appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
    _________________________________
    Karen Angelini, Justice
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
    court on this 17th day of February, 2017.
    ___________________________________
    Keith E. Hottle
    Clerk of Court
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-17-00073-CV

Filed Date: 2/17/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/22/2017