in the Interest of E.T., a Child
12-16-00190-CV
| Tex. | Nov 30, 2016Background
- S.J. and W.T. are parents of E.T.; Department filed petition (June 25, 2015) seeking protection, conservatorship, and termination of S.J.’s parental rights.
- S.J. initially filed an affidavit of indigence and an attorney ad litem was appointed, but she later retained and replaced private counsel twice.
- A mediation was set for May 27, 2016; S.J. fired her second retained attorney about one week earlier, the attorney filed to withdraw the day before mediation, and the trial court granted the withdrawal.
- S.J. attended the mediation pro se, signed a mediated settlement agreement (MSA) that included an affidavit of voluntary relinquishment, and later asked the trial court to modify the MSA and said she had no counsel at mediation.
- The trial court treated the MSA as binding, found S.J. executed an irrevocable affidavit supporting termination under Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b)(1)(K), and found termination was in the child’s best interest; judgment terminating S.J.’s parental rights followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion by entering termination based on MSA because S.J. lacked counsel at mediation | S.J.: mediation proceeded without counsel; court should have rescheduled or appointed counsel, making MSA invalid | Department/Trial court: S.J. voluntarily fired counsel, did not request rescheduling or appointment, attended and signed MSA and irrevocable affidavit | Court: No abuse of discretion—S.J. waived complaint by not asking court to act; MSA met statutory requirements so judgment proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Garcia v. Garcia, 170 S.W.3d 644 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2005) (abuse-of-discretion review of orders based on MSAs)
- Garcia–Udall v. Udall, 141 S.W.3d 323 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004) (trial court limited to MSA terms once agreement qualifies)
- Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc., 701 S.W.2d 238 (Tex. 1985) (standard for abuse of discretion)
- In re V.L.B., 445 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014) (failure to appoint counsel for indigent parent before trial distinguishes facts where reversal is required)