in the Interest of D.S., a Child, 455 S.W.3d 750

On Jan. 7, 2013, the Department filed a petition to terminate Dale’s parental rights to D.S. and was allowed to take possession via an emergency order; the Department became sole temporary managing conservator.
The original dismissal date under statute was Jan. 13, 2014, later extended to July 12, 2014, with a final hearing notice issued for June 24, 2014.
The final hearing was repeatedly continued; on July 10, 2014 the hearing was recessed after the court asked for a new date and did not conduct substantive proceedings.
Dale filed a motion to dismiss on July 25, 2014 for failure to try the matter within the statutory time period; the court overruled the motion and trial proceeded on Aug. 11, 2014.
Dale’s parental rights were terminated after the August 11, 2014 trial; Dale appeals the denial of his motion to dismiss.
The court reverses and renders a dismissal without prejudice, applying Tex. Fam. Code § 263.401(c) and Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(c).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion denying the motion to dismiss under § 263.401.	Dale contends the court failed to commence trial on the merits and erred by not dismissing.	Department argues the court validly retained the case to continue the termination proceedings.	Yes; the court abused its discretion and should have dismissed without prejudice.

Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (parens patriae and high constitutional importance of parental rights)
Watt v. White, Smith & Baldwin, 46 Tex. 338 (Tex. 1876) (early removal/trial timing context guiding timely actions)
Sanchez v. State, 138 S.W.3d 324 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (trial-on-the-merits concept as a late phase in enforcement actions)
In re T.M., 33 S.W.3d 341 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2000) (statutory deadlines in termination actions and permanence for children)