In the Interest of A.H., a Child
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Appellant Mother attempts to appeal from the trial court's order terminating her parental rights to her son A.H. On October 25, 2011, we sent appellant's counsel a letter stating our concern that we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal because it appeared that neither the trial court's July 27, 2011 Order of Termination nor the trial court's October 17, 2011 Modified Order of Termination disposed of intervenor James Herron. We informed appellant's counsel that the parties had until November 4, 2011, to furnish this court with a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal or this appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.3(a). Appellant's attorney filed a response, agreeing that intervenor James Herron had not been disposed of in the trial court's orders and stating that Appellee Texas Department of Family and Protective Services plans to set the intervenor's pleading for trial. Because the trial court's orders currently before us do not dispose of all parties, there is no final judgment. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); In re M.G.T., No. 02–10–00340–CV, 2011 WL 255542, at *1 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth Jan. 27, 2011, no pet.) (mem.op.) (dismissing appeal for want of jurisdiction because there was no final judgment).
PANEL: WALKER, MCCOY, and MEIER, JJ.
DELIVERED: January 19, 2012
FN1. See Tex.R.App. P. 47.4.. FN1. See Tex.R.App. P. 47.4.