Articles Posted in Termination

The Texas Supreme Court recently denied review in a child custody case, leaving the underlying appellate decision fully intact without a written explanation, in In the Interest of E.A.G., No. 09-24-00174-CV (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2025). The order stresses an important facet of Texas family law: in most custody and parental-rights cases, the court of appeals is effectively the final stop in the litigation process.

The denial also reflects the limited circumstances in which the Texas Supreme Court exercises discretionary review over family law matters, even where the stakes involve termination of parental rights or long-term conservatorship determinations.

The Underlying Appeal

Texas appellate courts apply a strict and high standard when reviewing orders terminating parental rights. Once a jury finds statutory grounds for termination under Texas Family Code § 161.001 and the trial court enters judgment supported by clear and convincing evidence, reversal on appeal becomes difficult absent a significant procedural or legal error. Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b); In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. 2002).

A recent decision from the Third Court of Appeals in Austin demonstrates this exacting standard. In B.B. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, the court affirmed a jury verdict terminating a mother’s parental rights after her own appointed appellate counsel filed what is known as an Anders brief, advising the court that no non-frivolous grounds for appeal existed. B.B. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, No. 03-25-00649-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 8, 2026).

The Jury Findings and the Anders Brief

iStock-839381426

There is a strong presumption in Texas family law that it is in the child’s best interest for a parent to be awarded custody over a non-parent. In a recent case, a father appealed a judgment naming him joint managing conservator with the child’s maternal grandmother. A central issue in the case was the father’s argument that he should have been appointed the child’s sole managing conservator based upon the parental presumption.

Continue Reading ›

Should a rapist have the right to custody of a child who was conceived by rape?  The United States Senate recently answered—unanimously—“No!” to that very question when it passed an amendment to human trafficking legislation that would give states a strong incentive to ban rapists from having parental rights regarding a resulting child.

The Rape Survivor Child Custody Act passed the Senate 99-0 and targets a pressing problem: in 40 out of 50 states, a woman cannot sue to terminate the parental rights of her rapist. In those states, a rapist can sue for custody of a child conceived by the rape.  That means that a woman could be forced to face her rapist “every other weekend” to exchange their child—an outcome that can have devastating traumatic results. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information