In the Interest of O.L.M., a Child v. the State of Texas
Docket 01-25-00670-CV
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Texas
- Court
- Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
- Type
- Lead Opinion
- Case type
- Family
- Disposition
- Dismissed
- Docket
- 01-25-00670-CV
Appeal from interlocutory temporary orders in a suit to modify the parent-child relationship.
Summary
The First District of Texas dismissed Mother’s appeal of the trial court’s temporary orders in a suit to modify the parent-child relationship for lack of jurisdiction. The court explained it may only hear final judgments or interlocutory orders that statutes specifically allow, and temporary orders in modification suits are not appealable interlocutory orders. The opinion noted such orders may be challenged by mandamus but not by interlocutory appeal, granted Father’s motion to dismiss, and dismissed other pending motions as moot.
Issues Decided
- Whether temporary orders in a suit to modify the parent-child relationship are subject to interlocutory appeal.
- Whether the appellate court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from such temporary orders.
Court's Reasoning
The court relied on the statutory rule that it has jurisdiction only over final judgments and those interlocutory orders explicitly authorized by statute. Texas law and precedent hold that temporary orders in a modification suit are not among the interlocutory orders the legislature made appealable. The court therefore lacked jurisdiction to consider the appeal and dismissed it, noting mandamus is the appropriate remedy to challenge such temporary orders.
Authorities Cited
- Bison Building Materials, Ltd. v. Aldridge422 S.W.3d 582 (Tex. 2012)
- CMH Homes v. Perez340 S.W.3d 444 (Tex. 2011)
- Texas Family Code § 105.001(e)TEX. FAM. CODE § 105.001(e)
Parties
- Appellant
- Mother (O.L.M.'s mother)
- Appellee
- Father
- Judge
- Per Curiam, Justices Rivas-Molloy, Johnson, and Dokupil
Key Dates
- Opinion issued
- 2026-04-30
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider filing for mandamus relief
If Mother seeks immediate review of the temporary orders, she should consult counsel about filing a petition for writ of mandamus in the appropriate appellate court, as the opinion indicates mandamus is the proper remedy.
- 2
Evaluate options for final appeal
If the trial court issues a final order resolving the parent-child relationship, consider appealing that final judgment, since final judgments are appealable.
- 3
Consult family law counsel
Speak with a family law attorney to assess procedural timing, preservation of issues, and the best strategy to obtain relief from the temporary orders.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The court dismissed Mother’s appeal of temporary orders in a child custody modification case because it lacks jurisdiction to hear such interlocutory appeals.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The parties in this particular modification suit (Mother and Father) and other litigants in Texas seeking to appeal temporary orders in similar parent-child modification proceedings.
- What happens next in this case?
- The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; any challenge to the temporary orders would need to proceed by a different remedy such as a petition for writ of mandamus.
- Can this dismissal be appealed?
- Dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is a final disposition of the appeal; further recourse would generally be to seek mandamus relief or comply with any statutory procedures rather than another interlocutory appeal.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
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.
2