in the Interest of L.G.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 21, 2015
Docket09-15-00115-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in the Interest of L.G. (in the Interest of L.G.) 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 L.G., (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-15-00115-CV ____________________

IN THE INTEREST OF L.G.

_______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 12-11-12087 CV ________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

E.W., the father of L.G., a minor child, filed a notice of appeal from the trial

court’s order of March 31, 2015, which approved L.G.’s removal from his

placement in Arizona under the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children

and approved L.G.’s placement by the Texas Department of Family and Protective

Services in Texas. See generally Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 162.102 (West 2014) (the

Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children, or “ICPC”). At all times relevant

to this appeal, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services has been

the child’s permanent managing conservator. In general, incidental orders signed

1 after the Department has been appointed as a child’s permanent managing

conservator are not appealable as final orders. See In re H.M.C., No. 10-14-00059-

CV, 2014 WL 2463079, at *1 (Tex. App.—Waco Mar. 20, 2014, no pet.) (mem.

op.); In re A.J., No. 02-11-00442-CV, 2012 WL 171262, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort

Worth Jan. 19, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op.) (permanency hearing orders). We notified

the parties that the appeal would be dismissed unless our jurisdiction over the

appeal could be established. After reviewing the parties’ responses, the clerk’s

record, and the reporter’s record of the hearing on the Department’s motion, we

conclude that the trial court’s March 31, 2015 order is not a final order from which

an appeal is authorized. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

________________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice

Submitted on May 20, 2015 Opinion Delivered May 21, 2015

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

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

Related

§ 162.102
Texas FA § 162.102

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in the Interest of L.G., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-lg-texapp-2015.