in the Interest of J.H. and B.H. Children

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 12, 2009
• Docket: 02-09-00264-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

                                                COURT OF APPEALS

                                                 SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                                                                FORT WORTH

                                        NO. 2-09-264-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.H. AND B.H., CHILDREN                                      

                                              ------------

           FROM THE 97TH DISTRICT COURT OF MONTAGUE COUNTY

                                MEMORANDUM OPINION^[1]

Appellant is attempting to appeal from an AAmended Final Order Confirming Support Arrearage and Modifying Support Obligation (UIFSA)@ signed by the associate judge of the 97th District Court.  But this is not a final, appealable order.  An associate judge may render only certain enumerated types of final orders:  (1) written orders agreed to in form and substance by all parties, (2) default orders, (3) orders in cases Ain which a party files an unrevoked waiver made in accordance with Rule 119, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, that waives notice to the party of the final hearing or waives the party=s appearance at the final hearing,@ and (4) final orders that include a waiver of the right of appeal pursuant to section 201.015(g) of the family code.  Tex. Fam. Code Ann. '  201.007(a)(14) (A), (B), (D), (16) (Vernon 2008), ' 201.015(g) (Vernon Supp. 2009); Tex. R. Civ. P. 119; see In re Lausch, 177 S.W.3d 144, 151 (Tex. App.CHouston [1st  Dist.] 2005, orig. proceeding).  The order in this case does not fall within any of the enumerated orders that an associate judge may render.  To be appealable, all other orders must be adopted by the presiding judge of the trial court.  See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. ' 201.016(b) (Vernon 2008); In re M.K.R., 216 S.W.3d 58, 64 (Tex. App.CFort Worth 2007, no pet.); Robles v. Robles, 965 S.W.2d 605, 609 n.4 (Tex. App.CHouston [1st Dist.] 1998, pet. denied).  Thus, because this order has not yet been adopted by the presiding judge, it is not final or appealable under the family code.  In addition, it is not an appealable interlocutory order under the civil practice and remedies code.  See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. ' 51.014(a) (Vernon 2008).  Thus, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL:  LIVINGSTON, DAUPHINOT, and GARDNER, JJ.

DELIVERED:  November 12, 2009

---

^[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.