Jake Hendrix v. Cheryl Bryant
Jake Hendrix v. Cheryl Bryant
Opinion
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 4, 2010.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-09-00897-CV
____________
JAKE HENDRIX, Appellant
V.
CHERYL BRYANT, Appellee
On Appeal from the 247th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 2007-31016
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
This is an attempted appeal from a judgment signed March 10, 2008. Appellant=s notice of appeal was filed October 19, 2009.
The notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed when appellant has not filed a timely motion for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion to reinstate, or request for findings of fact and conclusions of law. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1.
Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed timely. A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1, but within the fifteen-day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617-18 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed within the fifteen-day period provided by Rule 26.3
On February 3, 2010, notification was transmitted to all parties of the Court=s intent to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Appellant=s response fails to demonstrate that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Frost, Boyce, and Sullivan.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.