Opinion
No. 05-18-00169-CV
05-16-2018
IN THE INTEREST OF A.N.A., A.Y.A., AND A.I.A., MINOR CHILDREN
On Appeal from the 301st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DF 16-20167-T
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Lang-Miers, Myers, and Boatright
Opinion by Justice Lang-Miers
In this suit affecting the parent-child relationship, the trial court rendered a decree terminating the parent-child relationship between Mother and A.N.A., A.Y.A., and A.I.A. The trial court found that termination of the parent-child relationship between Mother and A.N.A., A.Y.A., and A.I.A. is in the best interest of the children, and that grounds for termination were established under section 161.001(1)(O) of the family code. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(2) (best interest of child) (West Supp. 2017); Id. § 161.001(b)(1)(O).
Subsection (O) of family code section 161.001(b)(1) provides that a court may order termination of the parent-child relationship if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the parent has "failed to comply with the provisions of a court order that specifically established the actions necessary for the parent to obtain the return of the child who has been in the permanent or temporary managing conservatorship of the Department of Family and Protective Services for not less than nine months as a result of the child's removal from the parent under Chapter 262 for abuse or neglect of the child."
In this appeal, Mother does not challenge the termination of her parental rights. In two issues, she (1) contends the trial court abused its discretion in determining that placement with Mother's Aunt would not be in the children's best interest, and (2) challenges the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence to support the trial court's appointment of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (the "Department") as managing conservator of A.N.A., A.Y.A., and A.I.A. Appellee responds that Mother lacks standing to challenge the trial court's conservatorship determination, and in the alternative argues that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in making the challenged rulings.
We conclude that Mother lacks standing to challenge the trial court's determinations regarding conservatorship of the children. An order terminating a parent's rights to a child divests the parent and child of all legal rights and duties with respect to each other except the child's right to inherit from and through the parent. Id. § 161.206(b). Mother does not appeal the trial court's ruling regarding the grounds for termination or its finding that termination of the parent-child relationship is in the best interest of A.N.A., A.Y.A., and A.I.A. See id. § 161.001(b)(1)(O), (b)(2). Consequently, the trial court's rulings are binding on Mother. See In re A.G., No. 05-16-01207-CV, 2017 WL 655954, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Feb. 17, 2017, pet. denied). Upon termination of the parent-child relationship between Mother and A.N.A., A.Y.A., and A.I.A., Mother lost all legal rights with respect to A.N.A., A.Y.A., and A.I.A. As a result, Mother does not have standing to challenge the portion of the trial court's decree appointing the Department, not Aunt, as managing conservator of the children. Id. (citing In re H.M.M., 230 S.W.3d 204, 204 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.)).
Because Mother does not have standing to challenge the appointment of the Department as managing conservator of A.N.A., A.Y.A., and A.I.A., or the failure to appoint Aunt, we do not have subject matter jurisdiction over her claim. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.
/Elizabeth Lang-Miers/
ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS
JUSTICE 180169F.P05
JUDGMENT
On Appeal from the 301st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DF 16-20167-T.
Opinion delivered by Justice Lang-Miers; Justices Myers and Boatright participating.
In accordance with this Court's opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. Judgment entered this 16th day of May, 2018.