NUMBER 13-16-00644-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
IN THE INTEREST OF L.L.O., A CHILD
On appeal from the 357th District Court
of Cameron County, Texas.
ORDER OF ABATEMENT
Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza and Longoria
Order Per Curiam
Appellant, the Office of the Attorney General of Texas (“the AG”), appeals an order
reducing appellee E.O.’s child support obligation to $0.00 a month.1 This cause is before
the Court on the AG’s Motion to Abate the Appeal for Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law.
1 We use initials for the parent of the minor in an effort to protect the minor’s identity.
On August 30, 2016, the trial court issued its Order in Suit to Modify Child Support
that reduced appellee’s child support obligation. The AG filed a request for findings of
fact and conclusions of law on September 9, 2016. The trial court did not respond. The
AG filed a notice of past due findings and conclusions on October 4, 2016. The AG now
appeals the trial court’s judgment. In its motion to abate, the AG argues that given the
circumstances of the case it is left to guess at the legal and factual reasons for the trial
court’s judgment.
When properly requested, the trial court has a mandatory duty to file findings of fact
and conclusions of law. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 296. The failure of the trial court to file
findings and conclusions after a proper request is presumed harmful unless the record
affirmatively shows that the complaining party suffered no injury. Tenery v. Tenery, 932
S.W.2d 29, 30 (Tex. 1996) (per curiam). In this context, error is harmful if it is prevents
an appellant from properly presenting a case to the appellate court. TEX. R. APP. P.
44.1(a)(2); see Tenery, 932 S.W.2d at 30. The test for harm is whether the
circumstances of the case would require the appellant to guess at the reasons for the trial
court’s decision. Nicholas v. Envtl. Sys. (Int'l) Ltd., 499 S.W.3d 888, 894 (Tex. App.—
Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, pet. denied); Sagemont Plaza Shopping ex rel. O'Connor &
Associates, Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal Dist., 30 S.W.3d 425, 427 (Tex. App.—Corpus
Christi 2000, pet. denied).
The record reflects that the AG requested findings and conclusions within the
twenty-day period allowed by rule, and filed a notice of past due findings and conclusions
within thirty days of filing the original request. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 296, 297. On
2
reviewing the record, we find that the matters in question concerning the trial court’s
modification of appellee’s child-support obligation are disputed, and the reasons for the
trial court’s ruling are not obvious from the record. The trial court’s failure to file the
requested findings of fact and conclusions of law therefore harmed the AG by preventing
it from properly presenting the case to this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.1(a)(2). When
harm results from the trial court’s failure to file findings and conclusions, the proper
remedy is to abate the case for the trial court to correct its error pursuant to Texas Rule
of Appellate Procedure 44.4(b). Busch v. Hudson & Keyse, LLC, 312 S.W.3d 294, 298
(Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.); see TEX. R. APP. P. 44.4(b). We
accordingly GRANT the AG’s motion, abate this appeal, and remand it so that the trial
court can prepare and file findings of fact and conclusions of law. See TEX. R. APP. P.
44.4(b). The trial court shall cause its findings and conclusions to be included in a
supplemental clerk’s record. The supplemental clerk’s record shall be filed with the Clerk
of this Court within twenty days of the date of this order.
It is so ORDERED.
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
4th day of January, 2017.
3