Opinion
No. 07-20-00193-CV
11-23-2020
IN RE C.T. AND D.B., RELATORS
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before QUINN, C.J., and PIRTLE and DOSS, JJ.
In this original mandamus proceeding, Real Party in Interest, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss. Relators C.T. and D.B. are respectively the mother and father of C.B., a minor. They seek a writ of mandamus compelling respondent, the Honorable Kelly Tesch, associate judge of the 137th District Court of Lubbock County, to vacate her July 6, 2020 Order in Aid of Investigation of Child Abuse or Neglect and Notice of Hearing (the July 6 order). According to Relators, the July 6 order was an abuse of Respondent's discretion.
To maintain the child's privacy we will refer to him and his parents by initials. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 109.002(d) (West Supp. 2020); TEX. R. APP. P. 9.8 (a),(b).
As general background, the Department filed an ex parte Petition for Orders in Aid of Investigation of a Report of Child Abuse or Neglect. The July 6 order followed. Relators filed this original proceeding on August 3, with a motion for temporary relief. The requested temporary relief was denied. The Department filed a response and Relators a reply. On November 13, the Department filed the pending motion to dismiss this proceeding.
See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. §§ 261.303(b),(c); 261.3031(a) (West 2020) (providing a procedure for obtaining a court order in aid of investigation of a report of child abuse or neglect).
As grounds for dismissal the Department points to its notice of nonsuit filed in the trial court and Respondent's resulting order dismissing the July 6 order and dismissing without prejudice "all [the Department's] pleadings filed [in its petition] regarding" relators. According to the Department, Relators have moved from Texas and their requested mandamus relief is now moot. A certificate of conference attached to the motion to dismiss states that counsel for Relators does not oppose the motion. Consistent with the certificate, Relators filed no response.
Accordingly, without addressing the merits of Relators' petition, we grant the Department's motion and dismiss the original proceeding without prejudice.
Per Curiam