In the Interest of J.J.H., a child Appeal from 224th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-21-00443-CV IN THE INTEREST OF J.J.H., a Child From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2020-PA-01604 Honorable Susan D. Reed, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Delivered and Filed: December 22, 2021 DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION On October 15, 2021, appellant, a minor, filed a notice of appeal, stating his intent to appeal the trial court’s “order denying the motion to remove child from present custody” signed on October 6, 2021. The clerk’s record was filed on October 26, 2021 and it did not contain a final order. On November 5, 2021, this court issued an order requiring appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the trial court had not entered a final, appealable order. On November 12, 2021, the trial court clerk filed a supplemental clerk’s record, which contains an “Order on Hearing for Change of Placement” signed by the trial court on October 27, 2021. Because no appealable order had been entered in the underlying case, this court ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 04-21-00443-CV Appellant did not file a response showing that we have jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, appellant has not provided us, nor have we found, any statutory basis for our jurisdiction to consider his interlocutory appeal. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a) (listing interlocutory orders from which interlocutory appeal may be taken); Jack B. Anglin Co. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (holding that Texas appellate courts only have appellate jurisdiction over appeals from final orders or judgments, unless statute permits appeal from interlocutory order). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). PER CURIAM -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.