in the Interest of D.W., a Child

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 9, 2006
Docket04-05-00927-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in the Interest of D.W., a Child (in the Interest of D.W., a Child) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
in the Interest of D.W., a Child, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

DISSENTING OPINION

No. 04-05-00927-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF D.W., a Child

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2004-PA-00622

Honorable John J. Specia , Judge Presiding (1)



Opinion by: Sarah B. Duncan , Justice

Dissenting opinion by: Alma L. López , Chief Justice

Sitting: Alma L. López , Chief Justice

Sarah B. Duncan , Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion , Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 9, 2006

The order of termination recites that the termination case was heard on August 4, 2005, and the ad litem appointed to represent the child failed to appear. Although the trial court apparently appointed a substitute ad litem on the day of the hearing who signed the order approving it as to form, I question whether the substitute ad litem could have been prepared for the hearing on the date she was appointed. Furthermore, no ad litem was present at the "Re-Hearing on the Merits" also held on August 4, 2005.

Termination of parental rights is a drastic remedy, involving fundamental constitutional rights. In re G.M., 596 S.W.2d 846, 847 (Tex. 1980), In re S.M.L.C., 115 S.W.3d 30, 31 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 2003, no pet.). For this reason, the Texas Family Code mandates that an attorney ad litem be appointed to represent the interest of the child. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 107.012 (Vernon Supp. 2005); Gaitan v. Blevins, No. 04-95-00070-CV, 1996 WL 165529, at *2 (Tex. App.--San Antonio Apr. 10, 1996, no pet.) (noting mandatory nature of statute). Implicit in the mandatory requirement that an attorney ad litem be appointed is the requirement that the ad litem be present at the hearings in order to represent the child's interest. Just as a court's error in failing to appoint an ad litem can be raised for the first time on appeal, see Turner v. Lutz, 654 S.W.2d 57, 58 (Tex. App.--Austin 1983, no writ), the ad litem's failure to appear at a hearing also should be permitted to be raised for the first time on appeal. Because the majority holds that the failure to object to the absence of the ad litem waived this complaint, I respectfully dissent.

Alma L. López , Chief Justice

1. Associate Judge Richard Garcia presided over the termination hearing.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In the Interest of G. M.
596 S.W.2d 846 (Texas Supreme Court, 1980)
Turner v. Lutz
654 S.W.2d 57 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1983)
In the Interest of S.M.L.C.
115 S.W.3d 30 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in the Interest of D.W., a Child, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-dw-a-child-texapp-2006.