In the Interest of O.L.M., a Child v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
• Decided: April 30, 2026
• Docket: 01-25-00670-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued April 30, 2026

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-25-00670-CV ———————————

IN RE O.L.M., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 461st District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 123459F

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Mother1 filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s interlocutory

“Temporary Orders in Suit to Modify Parent-Child Relationship.” Appellee Father

filed a motion to dismiss, arguing in part that temporary orders in a suit to modify

1 We use generic names and initials to protect the child’s privacy. See TEX. FAM. CODE § 109.002(d). the parent-child relationship are unappealable interlocutory orders. Mother filed a

response, arguing she has properly appealed the subject temporary order.

This Court has jurisdiction over appeals only from final judgments and those

interlocutory orders specifically authorized by statute. See Bison Bldg. Materials,

Ltd. v. Aldridge, 422 S.W.3d 582, 585 (Tex. 2012); CMH Homes v. Perez, 340

S.W.3d 444, 447–48 (Tex. 2011); In re M.R.H., No. 04-24-00595-CV, 2024 WL

5194647, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Dec. 23, 2024, no pet.) (mem. op.); see

also TEX CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014 (authorizing appeals from certain

interlocutory orders). Temporary orders in a suit to modify the parent-child

relationship are not subject to interlocutory appeal, although they may be subject to

mandamus review. See TEX. FAM. CODE § 105.001(e); In re M.R.H., 2024 WL

5194647, at *1; In re T.R.L., 654 S.W.3d 16, 19 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.]

2022, no pet.).

We lack jurisdiction over this appeal because Mother cannot appeal the

subject interlocutory temporary order. See Salinas v. Melton, No. 01-15-00702-

CV, 2016 WL 3661845, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] July 7, 2016, no

pet.) (mem. op.). We grant Father’s motion and dismiss this appeal for want of

jurisdiction. We dismiss all other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Rivas-Molloy, Johnson, and Dokupil.