Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2024

John Anthony Hernandez v. Lilian Zusana Corado Office of the Attorney General of Texas

John Anthony Hernandez v. Lilian Zusana Corado Office of the Attorney General of Texas
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided May 21, 2024

John Anthony Hernandez v. Lilian Zusana Corado Office of the Attorney General of Texas

Opinion

Opinion issued May 21, 2024

In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00024-CV ——————————— JOHN ANTHONY HERNANDEZ, Appellant V. LILIAN ZUSANA CORADO; OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS, Appellees

On Appeal from the 328th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 22-DCV-297012

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant John Anthony Hernandez attempts to appeal from the trial court’s judgment signed October 9, 2023.

Generally, a notice of appeal is due within thirty days after the judgment is signed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1. The deadline to file a notice of appeal is extended to 90 days after the date the judgment is signed if any party timely files a motion for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion to reinstate, or, under certain circumstances, a request for findings of fact and conclusions of law. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). The time to file a notice of appeal may also be extended if, within days after the deadline to file the notice of appeal, a party properly files a motion for extension. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b), 26.3.

The record reflects that the trial court signed the final judgment on October 9, 2023, and no motions to extend the deadline to file a notice of appeal were timely filed. Therefore, appellant’s notice of appeal was due by November 8, 2023. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a).

Appellant untimely filed his notice of appeal on January 9, 2024. Without a timely filed notice of appeal, this Court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1.

On April 25, 2024, we notified appellant that his appeal was subject to dismissal for want of jurisdiction unless he filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Appellant filed a response but has not demonstrated that we have jurisdiction over this appeal.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Kelly and Goodman.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.