In the Interest of M.P and A.P, Children v. the State of Texas

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-25-00424-CV ___________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF M.P AND A.P, CHILDREN

On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 2 Parker County, Texas Trial Court No. CIV-22-0486

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Birdwell, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant E.H. (Mother) attempts to appeal from temporary orders entered in

the underlying suit affecting the parent–child relationship. But our appellate

jurisdiction is limited to appeals from final judgments and appealable interlocutory

orders, see CMH Homes v. Perez, 340 S.W.3d 444, 447 (Tex. 2011); Lehmann v. Har-Con

Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001), and the temporary orders are neither a final

judgment nor an appealable interlocutory order, Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 105.001(e); In

re F.R., No. 02-25-00314-CV, 2025 WL 2370583, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Aug.

14, 2025, no pet. h.) (mem. op.).

Given this jurisdictional flaw, we warned Mother that we could dismiss her

appeal unless she showed grounds for continuing it. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

Mother responded with numerous filings, including a motion that we “confirm

jurisdiction [and] deny dismissal for want of prosecution,” a “notification regarding

[her request for a] federal injunction,” a motion to stay the trial court proceedings, a

statement alleging child neglect, two briefs challenging the temporary orders and the

resolution of Mother’s previous appeal, and a “request for writ of prohibition”

seeking mandamus or “habeas relief” based on “the continued withholding of the

children.” [Capitalization altered.] None of these filings show grounds for continuing

the appeal; at the end of the day, “[t]emporary orders rendered [in a suit affecting the

parent–child relationship] are not subject to interlocutory appeal.” Tex. Fam. Code

Ann. § 105.001(e).

2 We therefore dismiss Mother’s attempted appeal for want of jurisdiction. See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); see also F.R., 2025 WL 2370583, at *1 (dismissing

attempted appeal from temporary orders for want of jurisdiction). All of Mother’s

pending motions are denied, as is Mother’s alternative request that we construe her

appeal as an original proceeding. See F.R., 2025 WL 2370583, at *1 (denying similar

request in similar attempted appeal).

/s/ Bonnie Sudderth

Bonnie Sudderth Chief Justice

Delivered: September 18, 2025