COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-15-00167-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF M.S., A
CHILD
----------
FROM THE 323RD DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
TRIAL COURT NO. 323-99315J-13
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT
----------
We have considered the “Parties’ Joint Motion to Dismiss Appeal and to
Modify the Judgment to Reflect the Parties’ Agreement, or Remand or Abate
Appeal to Effectuate Agreement,” filed by A.J. (the appellant/father), the
Department of Family and Protective Services (the appellee), and M.S. (the child
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
the subject of the termination proceeding). It is the court’s opinion that the
motion should be granted in part and denied in part. 2 Accordingly, without regard
to the merits, we vacate the trial court’s judgment as to A.J. only and remand the
case to the trial court for rendition of a judgment in accordance with the parties’
settlement agreement. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B), 43.2(d); Innovative
Office Sys., Inc. v. Johnson, 911 S.W.2d 387, 388 (Tex. 1995).
Regarding costs, A.J. is indigent, and the Department is exempt. See Tex.
Hum. Res. Code Ann. § 40.062 (West 2013). Accordingly, the court will not
assess costs. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.
PER CURIAM
PANEL: GARDNER, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ.
DELIVERED: October 15, 2015
2
The parties want their settlement agreement implemented by one of the
three means provided under rule 42.1(a)(2) of the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure. Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(A)–(C). The parties prefer that the court
render a judgment effectuating their agreement pursuant to rule 42.1(a)(2)(A).
Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(A). To the extent the court is proceeding pursuant to
rule 42.1(a)(2)(B), it is denying the parties’ requested relief under rules
42.1(a)(2)(A) and (C).
2
in the Interest of M.S., a Child
Combined Opinion