in the Interest of J.D.M., a Child

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that when no findings were made under § 153.131 that would independently support the trial court’s conservatorship order, the challenge to the conservatorship order was subsumed in the appeal of the parental-rights termination order
• holding the parent’s challenge to Department’s appointment as the child’s managing conservator “was subsumed in her appeal of the parental-rights termination order”
• holding the parent’s 25 challenge to the Department’s appointment as the child’s managing conservator “was subsumed in her appeal of the parental-rights termination order”
• holding parent’s challenge to Department’s conservatorship appointment was subsumed in appeal of parental-rights termination order when Department was appointed conservator solely based on section 161.207 as a result of termination order
• upholding appellate court’s reversal of conservatorship appointment when Department’s appointment was solely the consequence of termination decision under family code section 161.207
• when Department’s appointment as conservator is solely a result of termination of rights and termination is reversed on appeal, appellate court must also reverse the conservatorship appointment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).