Arthur Butcher v. City of San Antonio, Acting by and Through Its Agent City Public Service Board D/B/A CPS Energy ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                                     City of San Antonio, Acting
    by and through its agent City
    Fourth Court of Appeals
    San Antonio, Texas
    July 21, 2015
    No. 04-15-00338-CV
    Arthur BUTCHER,
    Appellant
    v.
    CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Acting by and through its agent City Public Service Board
    d/b/a CPS Energy,
    Appellee
    From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 2013-CI-05172
    Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding
    SHOW CAUSE ORDER
    The trial court signed a final judgment on April 27, 2015. Appellant’s notice of appeal
    was due to be filed on May 27, 2015. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). Appellant filed his notice of
    appeal on June 1, 2015. A motion for extension of time in which to file the notice of appeal was
    due on June 11, 2015, but was not filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3.
    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 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). Although
    appellant filed a notice of appeal within the fifteen-day grace period allowed by Rule 26.3, he did
    not file a motion for extension of time.
    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 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26); Dimotsis v.
    State Farm Lloyds, 
    966 S.W.2d 657
    , 657 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 1998, no pet.) (stating same
    under current Rule 26). However, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to
    file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. See id.; TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C).
    It is therefore ORDERED that appellant file, no later than August 5, 2015, a response
    presenting a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. If
    appellant fails to respond within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed. See TEX. R.
    APP. P. 42.3(c).
    All appellate filing dates are ABATED pending further orders from this court.
    _________________________________
    Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
    court on this 21st day of July, 2015.
    ___________________________________
    Keith E. Hottle
    Clerk of Court
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-15-00338-CV

Filed Date: 7/22/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/23/2015