in the Interest of L.D.and A.D., Children

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-21-00050-CV
___________________________
IN THE INTEREST OF L.D. AND A.D., CHILDREN
On Appeal from the 393rd District Court
Denton County, Texas
Trial Court No. 21-0275-393
Before Wallach, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Walker, J.
Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant H.N. (Mother) attempts to appeal from the trial court’s order
appointing the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (the Department)
the temporary managing conservator of her children L.D. and A.D. The trial court
issued the temporary order after a full adversary hearing under Texas Family Code
Section 262.201. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 262.201. We notified the parties of our
concern that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because the challenged order does
not appear to be a final judgment or an appealable, interlocutory order. See Tex. R.
App. P. 42.3. We informed the parties that we could dismiss the appeal absent a
timely response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 44.3.
Mother responded that a petition for writ of mandamus is the appropriate vehicle for
challenging a temporary order in a suit affecting the parent–child relationship
(SAPCR). See In re Pate, 407 S.W.3d 416, 418 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2013,
orig. proceeding). However, Mother has not filed a mandamus petition, nor has she
asked us to construe this appeal as a mandamus proceeding.
We may consider appeals only from final judgments or from interlocutory
orders made immediately appealable by the Texas Legislature. See Bonsmara Nat. Beef
Co. v. Hart of Tex. Cattle Feeders, LLC, 603 S.W.3d 385, 390 (Tex. 2020). Temporary
orders entered in a SAPCR are not appealable, interlocutory orders. Tex. Fam. Code
Ann. § 105.001(e); Dancy v. Daggett, 815 S.W.2d 548, 549 (Tex. 1991) (orig. proceeding)
(per curiam) (op. on reh’g); In re K.S., No. 02-20-00409-CV, 2021 WL 126596, at
2
*1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 14, 2021, no pet. h.) (per curiam) (mem. op.). This
rule applies to temporary orders issued after full adversary hearings in suits filed by
the Department. McLane v. Dep’t of Family & Protective Servs., No. 01-08-00363-CV,
2009 WL 1025730, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 9, 2009, no pet.)
(mem. op.); see Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §§ 105.001(e), 262.201(j) (referencing Chapter
105 of the Family Code).
Thus, we do not have jurisdiction over Mother’s attempted appeal, and we
dismiss it. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3, 43.2(f); McLane, 2009 WL 1025730, at *1. We
dismiss Mother’s April 6, 2021 motion to dismiss the appeal as moot.
Per Curiam
Delivered: April 15, 2021
3