in the Interest of S.E.P. a Child

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided November 7, 2018·No. 04-18-00417-CV·Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-18-00417-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.E.P., a Child

From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013 EM5-04455 Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Irene Rios, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 7, 2018 DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION On June 20, 2018, the trial court signed a final order in this suit to modify the parent-child relationship. The next day, Appellant filed a notice of appeal. On July 13, 2018, Appellant timely filed a motion for new trial—which the trial court granted. Later, the trial court set a hearing on temporary orders for August 30, 2018. On that date, the trial court held the hearing and signed the parties’ agreement for temporary orders.

On October 4, 2018, we advised Appellant that, generally, “an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment. A judgment is final for purposes of appeal if it disposes of all pending parties and claims in the record, except as necessary to carry out the decree.” Lehmann v. Har- Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). We further advised Appellant that temporary orders in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship are not subject to interlocutory appeal, Dancy v.

04-18-00417-CV

Daggett, 815 S.W.2d 548, 549 (Tex. 1991) (per curiam), and are not final orders subject to regular appeal, In re Chester, 357 S.W.3d 103, 106 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011, no pet.). We ordered Appellant to show cause to this court in writing by October 15, 2018, why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). To date, Appellant has not filed a response to our October 4, 2018 order.

The appellate record does not contain an appealable order, see In re Chester, 357 S.W.3d at 106, and Appellant has not shown why this appeal should not be dismissed, see Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 95. We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See id.

PER CURIAM

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

in the Interest of S.E.P. a Child, (Tex. Ct. App. 2018).

in the Interest of S.E.P. a Child (in the Interest of S.E.P. a Child) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.
39 S.W.3d 191 (Texas Supreme Court, 2001)
Dancy v. Daggett
815 S.W.2d 548 (Texas Supreme Court, 1991)
In re Chester
357 S.W.3d 103 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2011)