Garza v. Hibernia National Bank
Cases that cite this one
98 later published cases cite this decision. The 24 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Albert Morris v. Wells Fargo Bank (Tex. App. 2019)
- Rickey Wayne Tolbert v. George A. Otstott (Tex. App. 2014)
- Jose Sylvestere Lopez v. Claudia Lopez (Tex. App. 2014)
- Dallas W. Scott v. Washington Mutual Bank (Tex. App. 2014)
- Dallas W. Scott v. Risd (Tex. App. 2014)
- in the Interest of H.M. Minor Child (Tex. App. 2013)
- GQ Enterprises Corporation v. Inayatali Rajani and the Rajani Group (Tex. App. 2013)
- in the Interest of J.C.P. (Tex. App. 2013)
- Penny v. Shell Oil Products Co. (Tex. App. 2011)
- Michael Moore and Christine M. Huddleston v. Freedom Mortgage Corporation (Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland) 2025)
- TX Holdings Corp D/B/A Sterling Park and Mercer Holdings Corp. v. Eaglehart Ranch, LLC (Tex. App. 2025)
- Reynaldo Gutierrez v. Hochheim Prairie Farm Mutual Insurance Company (Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland) 2025)
- Nathan Zuniga v. Jayson Blue Bastardo Brown County Sheriff's Department Employees Association And Brown County (Tex. App. 2024)
- John Wesley Covington v. Dolores Maldonado Covington (Tex. App. 2024)
- George Alois Meissner v. Lorna Brooke Meissner (Tex. App. 2024)
- William W. Ruth and Medical Park Memorial v. Joe Cooksey (Tex. App. 2023)
- In the Interest of A.C.T.M., a Child v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2023)
- In the Interest of C.M.S., S.M.S., M.L.S., and O.A.S., Children v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2023)
- Brian Orlando Williams v. Alton Smith and Alicia Smith (Tex. App. 2023)
- Susan J. Boyer v. Springleaf Financial Services, Inc. (Tex. App. 2022)
- Kirk Launius v. Diana Flores, in Her Official Capacity as Presiding Officer, Chair of Trustees, of Dallas County Community College District (Tex. App. 2022)
- in the Interest of M.M.L.M., a Child (Tex. App. 2022)
- 2008 Lexus, TX Lic No KTD3353, VIN No 2T2HK31U48C095370 and One Thousand Eight Dollars ($1,008.00) United States Currency v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2022)
- Jeffery Lang Wilson v. Jeannie Marie Coleman (Tex. App. 2022)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
OPINION
Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. On March 24, 2006, the trial court signed the final judgment. Appellant filed a timely motion for new trial, which was overruled by operation of law on June 7, 2006. The trial court held a hearing and denied the motion on June 26, 2006. 1 Appellant filed his notice of appeal on July 20, 2006, 118 days after the judgment was signed.
If a party files a motion for new trial, a notice of appeal must be filed within 90 days after the judgment is signed. Tex. R.App. P. 26.1. The timely filing of a notice of appeal invokes the jurisdiction of the court of appeals. Tex.R.App. P. 25.1. Therefore, if the notice of appeal is not timely filed, the court of appeals is without jurisdiction to consider the appeal. A court of appeals may extend the time to file a notice of appeal if, within 15 days after the deadline for filing the notice, the party (1) files in the trial court the notice of appeal and (2) files in the court of appeals a motion complying with rule 10.5(b) to extend the time to file the motion. Tex.R.App. P. 26.3,10.5(b). 2
*234 Appellant’s deadline for filing his notice of appeal was June 22, 2006. His deadline for filing a motion to extend the time to file a notice of appeal was July 7, 2006. Appellant’s notice of appeal was filed 28 days late. In his November 8, 2006 response to appellee’s motion to dismiss, appellant requested an extension of time for filing his notice of appeal. However, this request was filed approximately four months after the July 7 deadline for such a request. Therefore, we may not grant an extension of time to file the notice of appeal.
Because appellant’s notice of appeal and his request for an extension of time were not timely filed, we have no jurisdiction to consider this appeal. Therefore, we grant appellee’s motion. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. All other pending motions are overruled as moot.
. At the time of the hearing, the trial court still had plenary jurisdiction, which expired on July 7, 2006, and could have granted a new trial. Tex.R. Civ. P. 329b(e). However, the trial court’s denial of the motion did not extend the time for filing a notice of appeal beyond the 90-day deadline. See TexR.App. P. 26.1.
. This rule has been modified by Verburgt v. Domer, 959 S.W.2d 615 (Tex. 1997). In Ver-burgt, the supreme court held that an appeal bond filed within the 15-day grace period implied a motion to extend the time to file the bond. Id. at 617. This Court has applied Verburgt to notices of appeal. See, e.g., McCluskey v. State, 64 S.W.3d 621, 623 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.). Because appellant’s notice of appeal was filed more than 15 days after the date on which it was due, the Verburgt rule does not apply to this case.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.