In the Interest of M.S., S.M., K.S., and A.G., Children v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 28, 2024
• Docket: 07-24-00264-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-24-00264-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF M.S., S.M., K.S., AND A.G., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 100th District Court Hall County, Texas Trial Court No. 8233, Honorable Ron Enns, Presiding

August 28, 2024 ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before QUINN, C.J., and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ.

Appellant, T.S., appeals from the trial court’s order terminating her parental rights

to her children, M.S., S.M., K.S., and A.G.1 We remand for further proceedings.

Appellee, the Department of Family and Protective Services, sued T.S. for

protection and conservatorship of her children and termination of her parental rights. The

matter was referred to the Honorable Associate Judge Carrie Baker and heard on April

24, 2024. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. §§ 201.201–.204. The following day, April 25, Judge

Baker signed an Order of Termination and Order Appointing Permanent Managing

1 To protect the privacy of the parties involved, we refer to them by their initials. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 109.002(d); TEX. R. APP. P. 9.8(b). Conservator. According to the record before this Court, no request for de novo hearing

was filed. See id. at §§ 201.015, 201.2042. Consequently, Judge Baker’s Order of

Termination and Order Appointing Permanent Managing Conservator became the order

of the referring court on April 25, 2024, by operation of law. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN.

§ 201.2041(a); In the Interest of B.C., No. 07-19-00290-CV, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 8700,

at *2–3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Sep. 26, 2019, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op.).

Despite the apparent lack of a de novo hearing request, the Honorable Judge Ron

Enns, the referring court, subsequently signed two orders concerning the termination

proceedings. First, on June 10, 2024, Judge Enns added an addendum to Judge Baker’s

order titled Order Adopting Associate Judge’s Proposed Order. The addendum states

“. . . no demand for court proceeding having been made in the time and manner permitted

by law, it is ORDERED that said orders be and are hereby adopted as the orders of this

Court.” Two days later, on June 12, Judge Enns issued an Order Affirming Order of

Termination after De Novo Hearing Before the Referring Court. It states that T.S.

“. . . timely requested a de novo hearing before the referring Court,” indicates that a de

novo hearing occurred on May 30, 2024, and affirms Judge Baker’s Order of Termination

and Order Appointing Permanent Managing Conservator.

A timely notice of appeal is essential to invoking this Court’s jurisdiction. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 2 (providing that appellate courts may not suspend a rule’s operation or order

a different procedure to alter the time for perfecting an appeal), 25.1(b), 26.1; Verburgt v.

Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 616 (Tex. 1997). Without a timely request for de novo hearing,

Judge Enns’s orders have no effect on the finality of Judge Baker’s order, nor do they

alter the deadline to file a notice of appeal. T.S.’s notice of appeal was, therefore, due

2 within twenty days after Judge Baker signed the Order of Termination and Order

Appointing Permanent Managing Conservator, by May 15, 2024. See TEX. R. APP. P.

26.1(b), 28.4(a). T.S. filed a notice of appeal on June 27, 2024.2

By letter of August 20, 2024, we notified the parties that it did not appear we have

jurisdiction over this appeal. In response, T.S. asserts that she timely filed a request for

de novo hearing and, as evidence, attaches a copy of her electronic filing certificate

indicating that a “Request for De Novo Hearing.pdf” was submitted to the trial court clerk

for filing at 9:30 am on April 25, 2024. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 21(f) (concerning electronic

filing).

To determine the timeliness of T.S.’s notice of appeal, we abate the appeal and

remand the proceedings to the trial court to conduct a hearing and ascertain:

(1) whether T.S. waived the right of a de novo hearing;

(2) if not, on what date did T.S. receive notice of the substance of Judge Baker’s Order of Termination and Order Appointing Permanent Managing Conservator;

(3) whether T.S. filed a written request for de novo hearing with the trial court clerk; and

(4) if so, on what date the request for de novo hearing was filed with the trial court clerk. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 201.015, 201.2042.

The trial court is directed to enter such orders necessary to address the

aforementioned questions. So too shall it include its findings on those matters in a

supplemental clerk’s record and cause that record to be filed with this Court by September

18, 2024.

2 The trial court clerk did not forward the notice of appeal to this Court for filing until August 8,

2024. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a), (f).

3 It is so ordered.

Per Curiam