In the Interest of L.G. Appeal from County Court at Law No 3 of Montgomery County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-15-00115-CV ____________________ IN THE INTEREST OF L.G. _______________________________________________________ ______________ On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 12-11-12087 CV ________________________________________________________ _____________ MEMORANDUM OPINION E.W., the father of L.G., a minor child, filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s order of March 31, 2015, which approved L.G.’s removal from his placement in Arizona under the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children and approved L.G.’s placement by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services in Texas. See generally Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 162.102 (West 2014) (the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children, or “ICPC”). At all times relevant to this appeal, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services has been the child’s permanent managing conservator. In general, incidental orders signed 1 after the Department has been appointed as a child’s permanent managing conservator are not appealable as final orders. See In re H.M.C., No. 10-14-00059CV, 2014 WL 2463079, at *1 (Tex. App.—Waco Mar. 20, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.); In re A.J., No. 02-11-00442-CV, 2012 WL 171262, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 19, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op.) (permanency hearing orders). We notified the parties that the appeal would be dismissed unless our jurisdiction over the appeal could be established. After reviewing the parties’ responses, the clerk’s record, and the reporter’s record of the hearing on the Department’s motion, we conclude that the trial court’s March 31, 2015 order is not a final order from which an appeal is authorized. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. APPEAL DISMISSED. ________________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice Submitted on May 20, 2015 Opinion Delivered May 21, 2015 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 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.
