in the Interest of Z.P., Child

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 20, 2006
Docket14-06-00198-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in the Interest of Z.P., Child (in the Interest of Z.P., Child) 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 Z.P., Child, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 20, 2006

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 20, 2006.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-06-00198-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF Z.P., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 328th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 05CV140617

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

The trial court signed a final order, terminating appellant=s parental rights on October 24, 2005.  In January and February 2006, appellant filed in the trial court motions to dismiss the petition of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services under section 263.401 of the Family Code.  Because a final order had already been signed, the trial judge notified appellant by letter, dated February 20, 2006, that a final order had been signed on October 24, 2005, and denied appellant=s request for a hearing on the motions.  On February 27, 2006, appellant filed a ANotice of Interlocutory Accelerated Appeal,@ which states that appellant is appealing a AFebruary 22, 2006 Order implicitly denying [appellant=s] motion seeking relief pursuant to V.T.C.A. Family Code ' 263.401.@ 


The record reveals no appealable orders signed on February 22, 2006.  The trial court advised appellant by letter dated February 20, 2006, that appellant=s motions were denied, but this letter ruling on the motions is not an appealable order or judgment.

On March 14, 2006, notification was transmitted to all parties of the Court=s intent to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).  Appellant=s response fails to demonstrate that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed April 20, 2006.

Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Edelman, and Frost.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in the Interest of Z.P., Child, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-zp-child-texapp-2006.