In the interest of: T.S.A. Appeal of: J.B. ( 2014 )

J-S57029-14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
IN THE INTEREST OF: T.S.A., A MINOR IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
APPEAL OF: J.B., MOTHER
No. 638 EDA 2014
Appeal from the Decree January 15, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Family Court at No(s): CP-51-AP-0000727-2013
CP-51-DP-0001514-2012
IN THE INTEREST OF: D.K.R., A MINOR IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
APPEAL OF: J.B., MOTHER
No. 639 EDA 2014
Appeal from the Decree January 15, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Family Court at No(s): CP-51-AP-0000728-2013
CP-51-DP-0001512-2012
IN THE INTEREST OF: T.M.A., A MINOR IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
APPEAL OF: J.B., MOTHER
No. 640 EDA 2014
J-S57029-14
Appeal from the Decree January 15, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Family Court at No(s): CP-51-AP-0000729-2013
CP-51-DP-0001513-2012
BEFORE: DONOHUE, J., MUNDY, J., and STABILE, J.
JUDGMENT ORDER BY MUNDY, J.: FILED DECEMBER 31, 2014
J.B. (Mother), appeals from the January 15, 2014 decrees involuntarily
terminating her parental rights and the concurrent orders changing the
permanency goals to adoption with respect to her sons, D.K.R., born in
August 2006, and T.M.A., born in September 2009, and her daughter,
T.S.A., born in June 2012 (collectively, the Children). 1 After careful review,
we quash these appeals.
Before we may address the merits of Mother’s appeal, we must first
determine whether this appeal is properly before us. We may raise issues
concerning our appellate jurisdiction sua sponte. Commonwealth v.
Patterson, 940 A.2d 493, 497 (Pa. Super. 2007), appeal denied, 960 A.2d
838 (Pa. 2008). In order to invoke our appellate jurisdiction, Pennsylvania
Rule of Appellate Procedure 903 requires that all “notice[s] of appeal … shall
be filed within 30 days after the entry of the order from which the appeal is
____________________________________________
1
We observe that the trial court sent the certified record to this Court more
than one month past the date it was due. Therefore, despite diligence by
this Court, the processing of this appeal has been delayed.
-2-
J-S57029-14
taken.”2 Pa.R.A.P. 903(a). Since this filing period is jurisdictional in nature,
it must be strictly construed and “may not be extended as a matter of
indulgence or grace.” Commonwealth v. Pena, 31 A.3d 704, 706 (Pa.
Super. 2011) (citation omitted).3
In the case sub judice, the trial court entered its final decrees
terminating Mother’s parental rights to the Children and orders changing the
permanency goal to adoption on Thursday, January 15, 2014. The trial
court’s docket indicates that notices of entry of all of the decrees and orders
were served on Mother by hand delivery on that same day. See generally
Pa.R.C.P. 236 (directing the prothonotary to immediately provide each party
and/or counsel with notice of the entry of an order, and to note the same in
the docket). As a result, Mother’s notices of appeal were due on Friday,
February 14, 2014. Mother’s notices of appeal were all filed on Tuesday,
February 18, 2014, 34 days after the decrees were entered and docketed.
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that Mother’s notices of appeal
were untimely filed, as they were not filed within 30 days of the final decrees
____________________________________________
2
Our Supreme Court has held that “an order terminating or preserving
parental rights … shall be deemed final when entered.” In re H.S.W.C.-B.,
836 A.2d 908, 911 (Pa. 2003).
3
We note “[s]ince the Rules of Appellate Procedure apply to criminal and
civil cases alike, the principles enunciated in criminal cases construing those
rules are equally applicable in civil cases.” Lineberger v. Wyeth, 894 A.2d
141, 148 n.4 (Pa. Super. 2006), citing Kanter v. Epstein, 866 A.2d 394,
400 n.6 (Pa. Super. 2004), appeal denied, 880 A.2d 1239 (Pa. 2005).
-3-
J-S57029-14
terminating Mother’s parental rights to the Children, or of the orders
changing the permanency goal to adoption. Accordingly, we conclude we
are without jurisdiction, and quash these appeals.
Appeals quashed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 12/31/2014
-4-