In this parental termination case, we determine whether a motion for new trial and notice of appeal combined in one document can invoke appellate jurisdiction. The court of appeals determined that the combined filing at issue in this appeal did not confer appellate jurisdiction and therefore failed to reach the merits of the appeal. Because the combined filing was titled a notice of appeal and expressed the party’s intent to appeal to the court of appeals, we conclude the document was a bona fide attempt to invoke appellate jurisdiction. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and remand for the court to consider the merits of the appeal.
Kimberly Spencer is the mother of J.M. and Z.M. The Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) petitioned to terminate Spencer’s parental rights. At the conclusion of the trial, the trial court ordered the termination of Spencer’s parent-child relationship with the children. Before the trial court signed the termination order, Spencer’s trial counsel filed a "Motion for New Trial or, in the Alternative, Notice of Appeal." Two days after filing this document, Spencer’s trial counsel filed a motion to withdraw, citing Spencer’s desire to appeal and the fact that he "does not do appellate work." The motion to withdraw reiterated that the "Motion for New Trial and Notice of Appeal has been filed," but that no hearing had been set. Less than a month later, the trial court signed the termination order, granted the motion to withdraw, and appointed appellate counsel. The district clerk forwarded Spencer’s "Motion for New Trial or, in the Alternative, Notice of Appeal" to the appellate court as a notice of appeal, but the court of appeals dismissed the suit for want of jurisdiction, holding that Spencer’s combined filing was not a bona fide attempt to invoke its appellate jurisdiction. __ S.W.3d __, __. We disagree.
