SB2165

In a case governed by the new Family Code 263.4012, if the court finds the child is missing from the child’s substitute care provider, it must retain jurisdiction and set a new dismissal date 180 days after the last dismissal date—not 180 days after the child disappeared. The subsection says the court may not dismiss until the earlier of the child being found or the date the child would no longer be eligible for Department of Family and Protective Services services or benefits. Final law, section 1.

Important limit: The very next subsection says that if the court retains jurisdiction but does not begin the trial on the merits before the dismissal date, jurisdiction ends and the suit is automatically dismissed without a court order. The enacted text therefore contains both a missing-child retention provision and an express automatic-dismissal rule. It should not be summarized as an unlimited extension while the child remains missing, or as requiring immediate dismissal merely because the child is found. Final law, section 1, subsections (a)–(b).

Separately, when the department is the child’s permanent managing conservator and the court must hold permanency hearings, the court may not dismiss the department’s suit while the child is missing from substitute care. The existing protection for children committed to, or supervised after release by, the Texas Juvenile Justice Department remains. Both are subject to the exception when the child is adopted or an individual other than the department becomes permanent managing conservator. Final law, section 2; Prior post-final-order rule.

“Substitute care” means care outside the child’s home while the child is in department conservatorship; the statutory definition includes more than foster homes. The earlier pending-case framework already had a one-year dismissal clock tied to the temporary conservatorship order and specified extensions. SB2165 adds this missing-child provision rather than replacing all those rules. Substitute-care definition; Existing dismissal framework; Final law.

Changes during passage: The introduced bill broadly barred the specified pending-case dismissal when the court found the child missing. The Senate substitute added the 180-day date, found-child/services-eligibility language and automatic-dismissal subsection. Those changes survived unchanged through the Senate-passed, House committee and enrolled versions. No floor amendments are listed. Introduced; Senate substitute; Senate-passed; House committee; Final law; Version index; Amendment index.

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Missing children may retain court oversight longer, while families, the department and courts face continued proceedings and must track the trial deadline. The act does not itself locate a child, decide parental rights or create a new benefit entitlement. The effect in an individual case depends on its stage and applicable dates. Final law.

The April 30 substitute fiscal note anticipates no significant state or local fiscal impact and assumes costs can be absorbed within existing resources. The April 15 introduced-version note gives the same budget conclusions. These are not estimates of any family’s legal costs or a guarantee of no court workload; the act makes no appropriation. Substitute fiscal note; Introduced fiscal note.