You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

in the Interest of I.C.D.N., a Minor Child

Citation: Not availableDocket: 05-17-01426-CV

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; January 28, 2018; Texas; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The appeal concerning the case "In the Interest of I.C.D.N., A Child" was reviewed by the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Texas. The appellant, Cheyenne Nguyen, challenged the trial court's order from November 21, 2017, which denied her plea to the jurisdiction. However, the appellate court questioned its jurisdiction over the appeal due to the nature of the order being interlocutory and not appealable. The court highlighted that appeals from interlocutory orders are generally limited to those involving governmental units as specified by Texas law. Since Nguyen is not a governmental unit and filed the plea herself, the court concluded that the order denying the plea does not qualify for interlocutory appeal. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and ordered Nguyen to pay the costs of the appeal to the appellees, Danghai Ho and Tung Ho. The judgment was entered on January 29, 2018.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appeals Involving Governmental Units

Application: The court explained that interlocutory appeals are generally limited to cases involving governmental units, which was not applicable in this case as the appellant was not a governmental unit.

Reasoning: The court highlighted that appeals from interlocutory orders are generally limited to those involving governmental units as specified by Texas law.

Interlocutory Appeal Limitations

Application: The appellate court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the order in question was interlocutory and not eligible for appeal under Texas law.

Reasoning: The appellate court questioned its jurisdiction over the appeal due to the nature of the order being interlocutory and not appealable.

Jurisdiction Over Appeals

Application: The court concluded it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal and therefore dismissed it.

Reasoning: Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and ordered Nguyen to pay the costs of the appeal to the appellees, Danghai Ho and Tung Ho.