In the Interest of M.B.B., a Child v. the State of Texas

In the
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-25-00057-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF M.B.B., A CHILD

On Appeal from the County Court at Law
Hopkins County, Texas
Trial Court No. CV41292

Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef
MEMORANDUM OPINION

On June 23, 2025, Appellant filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s “Order

Concerning Community Supervision,” which was signed on June 10, 2025. Appellant also filed

a motion for new trial on July 9, 2025, which the trial court granted the same day.

As a general rule, this Court has jurisdiction to decide appeals from final judgments and

from interlocutory orders as permitted by the Texas Legislature. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39

S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); Ruiz v. Ruiz, 946 S.W.2d 123, 124 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1997,

no writ) (per curiam). But “[w]hen a motion for new trial is granted, the case is reinstated on the

docket of the trial court and will stand for trial the same as though no trial had been conducted.”

In re A.C.M., No. 06-09-00090-CV, 2009 WL 4927552, at *1 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Dec. 23,

2009, no pet.) (mem. op.) (citing Wilkins v. Methodist Health Care Sys., 160 S.W.3d 559, 563

(Tex. 2005)). “Thus, when the trial court grants a motion for new trial, the trial court ‘essentially

wipes the slate clean and starts over.’” Id. (quoting Wilkins, 160 S.W.3d at 563).

In this case, the trial court granted Appellant’s motion for new trial within the period of

its plenary power. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 329b(d), (e); Thomas v. Oldham, 895 S.W.2d 352, 356

(Tex. 1995). Therefore, this appeal was rendered moot, and this Court lacks jurisdiction over the

appeal. See In re A.C.M., 2009 WL 4927552, at *1.

By letter dated July 15, 2025, we notified Appellant of this defect in our jurisdiction and

afforded her the opportunity to demonstrate proper grounds for our retention of the appeal. We

warned Appellant that, if we did not receive an adequate response by July 25, 2025, we would

dismiss her appeal. Appellant did not file a response to our letter.

2
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Charles van Cleef
Justice

Date Submitted: July 28, 2025
Date Decided: July 29, 2025

3