A.C. v. S.G.A.
This text of A.C. v. S.G.A. (A.C. v. S.G.A.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-25-00761-CV
A.C., Appellant
v.
S.G.A., Appellee
From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2025-CI-23409 Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Irene Rios, Justice Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Delivered and Filed: April 15, 2026
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION
On October 3, 2025, appellant A.C., proceeding pro se, filed an application for protective
order. On November 21, 2025, the trial court held a hearing on A.C.’s application. On November
25, 2025, A.C. filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s oral denial of her application for a
protective order. On December 4, 2025, the trial court signed an order denying A.C. a temporary
protective order and modifying visitation orders. Appellant ostensibly attempts to appeal from
this order. 04-25-00761-CV
The clerk’s record before us indicates that, according to A.C., there is a pending
“Registration of Foreign Custody/Support Order from Lucas County, Ohio” in the trial court. A.C
also contends that there is a pending suit affecting the parent-child relationship (SAPCR) that has
been stayed. Notwithstanding these pending actions, A.C. instituted the underlying separate action
by filing an application for protective order.
“Unless specifically authorized by statute, Texas appellate courts have jurisdiction only to
review final judgments.” McFadin v. Broadway Coffeehouse, LLC, 539 S.W.3d 278, 283 (Tex.
2018). Here, by A.C.’s pleaded assertions, the “Registration of Foreign Custody/Support Order
from Lucas County, Ohio” and SAPCR actions remain pending. The order denying A.C.’s
application for a protective order is an interlocutory order, for which no statute authorizes an
immediate appeal. Cf. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 81.009(c) (“A protective order rendered against a
party in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship may not be appealed until the time an order
providing for support of the child or possession of or access to the child becomes a final, appealable
order.”); In re A.J.F., No. 05-06-01514-CV, 2007 WL 465950, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Feb. 14,
2007, no pet.) (mem. op.) (per curiam) (dismissing for want of jurisdiction attempted appeal of
protective order rendered in still-pending SAPCR). Relatedly, the provisions in the December 4,
2025 order modifying visitation constitute a non-appealable interlocutory order in, according to
A.C., a pending SAPCR. In re B.V., No. 04-21-00086-CV, 2021 WL 2814896, at *2 (Tex. App.—
San Antonio Jul. 7, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op.) (per curiam) (noting that the part of the appealed
order restricting visitation and possession of the children modified prior temporary orders in the
case, and therefore, constituted a non-appealable interlocutory order).
Based on A.C.’s representations in documents in the clerk’s record, it appeared that the
December 4, 2025 order was neither a final, appealable judgment, nor an interlocutory order from
-2- 04-25-00761-CV
which an appeal was authorized by statute. Therefore, we ordered A.C. to show cause in writing
why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). A.C.
did not respond to our order. For these reasons, we do not have jurisdiction over A.C.’s attempted
appeal, and we dismiss her appeal for want of jurisdiction. See id.
-3-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
A.C. v. S.G.A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ac-v-sga-txctapp4-2026.