Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 29, 2015.

In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-14-00982-CV MICHELLE EISENBERG, Appellant V. MICHAEL EISENBERG, Appellee On Appeal from the 309th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010-68894 MEMORANDUM OPINION On December 10, 2014, appellant filed a notice of appeal in an attempt to appeal the trial court’s order awarding interim attorney’s fees signed November 25, 2014. The underlying suit seeks modification of the parent-child relationship as set out in the parties’ final divorce decree. The clerk’s record in this appeal was filed December 30, 2014. The record does not contain a final judgment in the modification suit.

Because it appeared that this court lacks jurisdiction over this attempted appeal from an interlocutory order, notification was transmitted to all parties of the court’s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Our notice advised the parties that the appeal would be dismissed unless appellant filed a response on or before January 16, 2015, demonstrating that this court has jurisdiction over the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). No response was filed.

Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har–Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Interlocutory orders may be appealed only when expressly permitted by statute. Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001); Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). The Texas Family Code specifically precludes the interlocutory appeal of temporary orders in suits affecting the parent-child relationship. See Tex. Fam. Code § 105.001(e); see also Mason v. Mason, 256 S.W.3d 716, 718 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, no pet.).

We lack jurisdiction over this attempted appeal from an interlocutory order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Accordingly, we order the appeal dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Donovan, and Wise.