In the Interest of L.D.M.W. v. the State of Texas

In re L.D.M.W. · Texas Court of Appeals, Ninth District at Beaumont · May 7, 2026 · No. 09-25-00495-CV

Summary

The Ninth Court of Appeals of Texas at Beaumont reviewed a father’s challenge to the termination of his parental rights under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(D), (E), (M), (N), and (P), and the best-interest finding. The court concluded that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient and affirmed the termination order.

Holdings

  1. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that Father knowingly placed or knowingly allowed James to remain in conditions or surroundings that endangered his physical or emotional well-being.
  2. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that Father engaged in conduct or knowingly placed James with persons whose conduct endangered James's physical or emotional well-being.
  3. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that terminating Father's parental rights was in James's best interest.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(D).
  2. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(E).
  3. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(M).
  4. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(N).
  5. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(P).
  6. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that termination was in the child's best interest under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(2).

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (22)

  • In re M.P., 639 S.W.3d 700, 702 (Tex. 2022)(followed)
  • In re N.G., 577 S.W.3d 230, 235, 237 (Tex. 2019)(followed)
  • In re E.A.F., 424 S.W.3d 742, 750 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014, pet. denied)(followed)
  • In re C.A.C. Jr., No. 09-10-00477-CV, 2011 WL 1744139, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont May 5, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.)(followed)
  • In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256, 266 (Tex. 2002)(followed)
  • In re J.L., 163 S.W.3d 79, 84 (Tex. 2005)(followed)
  • Jordan v. Dossey, 325 S.W.3d 700, 721-23 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, pet. denied)(followed)
  • In re J.O.A., 283 S.W.3d 336, 345 (Tex. 2009)(followed)
  • In re J.T.G., 121 S.W.3d 117, 125 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2003, no pet.)(followed)
  • In re M.R.J.M., 280 S.W.3d 494, 502 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2009, no pet.)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 22.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…