Opinion
01-21-00544-CV
08-30-2022
IN RE C.G., Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Landau, and Hightower.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
Relator C.G. filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging the trial court's September 21, 2021 order denying his requested temporary orders. The petition for writ of mandamus challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the trial court's findings that granting C.G. possessory rights to his two children, V.G. and E.G., was not in the children's best interest. The trial court subsequently held further permanency hearings and, on March 30, 2022, signed a "Post-Judgment Permanency Order" pursuant to Subchapter D, Chapter 263 of the Texas Family Code. The trial court again found that granting possessory rights to C.G. was not in the children's best interest. Real party in interest, the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS), now argues that C.G.'s challenge to the September 21, 2021 order is moot.
The underlying case is In re V.G. and E.G., Children, cause number 2018-04748J, pending in the 313th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Hon. Natalia Oakes presiding.
We have examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, the response filed by DFPS, C.G.'s reply, and the applicable law, and we agree with DFPS that this original proceeding challenging the September 21 order has been rendered moot. The March 30 order controls C.G.'s right of possession and access to the children, and that order is based on evidence presented at hearings that occurred after the trial court signed the September 21 order. Any ruling by this Court regarding the appropriateness of the September 21 order can no longer affect the parties' rights or interests on this matter. See Heckman v. Williamson Cnty., 369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012) (holding that claim for mandamus relief is moot when court's ruling can no longer affect parties' rights or interests); In re Cornyn, 27 S.W.3d 327, 331 n.11 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, org. proceeding) (recognizing that, when mandamus challenges temporary order that is no longer in effect or that has been superseded, mandamus challenge generally becomes moot).
Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus as moot. Any pending motions are also dismissed as moot.