This appeal challenges the trial court’s interlocutory orders denying appellant’s special appearance and second motion to transfer venue filed in connection with a petition to modify the parent-child relationship. It is well-settled, however, that interlocutory orders are appealable only if authorized by statute. See Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps , 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992). Interlocutory appeals from a special appearance order in a suit brought under the family code and an order refusing to transfer a suit affecting parent-child relationship are specifically prohibited. See EX . C IV . P RAC . & R EM . C ODE A NN . § 51.014(a)(7) (special appearance); T F AM C ODE NN . § 155.204(h) (transfer). In response to our *2 request for jurisdictional briefing, the parties do not dispute the orders are not appealable. ^[1] Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See R. PP P. 42.3(a).

/Bill Pedersen, III//

211047f.p05 BILL PEDERSEN, III

JUSTICE JUDGMENT IN THE INTEREST OF A.G. AND On Appeal from the 469th Judicial V.G., CHILDREN District Court, Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 469-52594- No. 05-21-01047-CV 2016.

Opinion delivered by Justice Pedersen, III, Justices Schenck and Molberg participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. Judgment entered this day of March 1, 2022.

[1] Appellant asserts we have mandamus jurisdiction over the orders, and we have construed an emergency motion filed in this appeal after we questioned our jurisdiction as a petition for writ of mandamus. The petition has been assigned appellate cause number 05-22-00077-CV.