Denise Prent v. rJet, L.L.C. ( 2016 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued September 22, 2016
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    ————————————
    NO. 01-16-00666-CV
    ———————————
    DENISE PRENT, Appellant
    V.
    rJET, L.L.C., Appellee
    On Appeal from the 234th District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Case No. 2013-20652
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant, Denise Prent, attempts to challenge the trial court’s order, signed
    on May 2, 2016, dismissing the lawsuit and assessing costs against the party
    incurring same. Prent has filed a motion for an extension of time to file her notice
    of appeal, and appellee, rJet, L.L.C., has filed a response.
    We deny Prent’s motion and dismiss the appeal.
    Generally, a notice of appeal is due within thirty days after a judgment is
    signed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1. The deadline to file a notice of appeal is extended
    to ninety 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 
    id. 26.1(a); see
    also TEX. R. CIV. P. 296, 329b(a), (g). The time to file a notice of appeal also
    may be extended if, within fifteen 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; see
    also Verburgt v. Dorner, 
    959 S.W.2d 615
    , 617 (Tex. 1997) (holding motion for
    extension of time implied when appellant, acting in good faith, files notice of appeal
    beyond rule 26.1 deadline but within rule 26.3 fifteen-day extension period).
    The trial court signed the dismissal order on May 2, 2016. Prent’s motion
    reflects that, on May 9, 2016, she filed a motion to reconsider that was overruled by
    operation of law on July 16, 2016. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 329b(a), (c), (g). Because
    she timely filed a motion to reconsider, her notice of appeal was due by August 1,
    2016, or by August 16, 2016, with a fifteen-day extension. See TEX. R. APP. P. 4.1,
    2
    26.1(a), 26.3. On August 22, 2016, Prent filed her notice of appeal in the trial court
    and her motion for extension of time in this Court.
    In her motion, Prent asserts that her notice of appeal was due on August 15,
    2016, suggesting that the deadline for filing the notice of appeal ran from the date
    her motion to reconsider was overruled by operation of law. However, the deadline
    for filing the notice of appeal did not run from that date but from the date the trial
    court signed the dismissal order. See Hartford Ins. Group v. Perez, No. 05-11-
    00195-CV, 
    2011 WL 2306800
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas June 13, 2011, no pet.)
    (mem. op.) (citing Weik v. Second Baptist Church of Houston, 
    988 S.W.2d 437
    , 438
    (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. denied)); Powell v. Linh Nutrition
    Programs, Inc., No. 01-03-00919-CV, 
    2005 WL 375334
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—
    Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 17, 2005, no pet.) (mem. op.) (citing Naaman v. Grider, 
    126 S.W.3d 73
    , 74 (Tex. 2003)); see also Fletcher v. Ahrabi, No. 01-12-00794-CV, 
    2012 WL 6082915
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 6, 2012, no pet.) (mem.
    op.) (citing Overka v. Bauri, No. 14-06-00083-CV, 
    2006 WL 2074688
    , at *1 & n.1
    (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] July 27, 2006, no pet.) (mem. op.)) (“An order
    denying a motion for new trial is not independently appealable.”).
    Here, Prent’s extension motion was due to be filed no later than August 16,
    2016. Her motion, filed on August 22, 2016, was untimely, and we cannot extend
    the deadline to file her notice of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3; see also Russell
    3
    & Smith Ford, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters of Tex. Ins. Co., No. 01-12-00441-
    CV, 
    2012 WL 3629043
    , at * 1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 23, 2012, no
    pet.) (mem. op.) (citing 
    Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617
    ) (“Once the fifteen-day period
    for granting a motion for extension of time has passed, a party can no longer invoke
    the appellate court’s jurisdiction.”). Accordingly, we deny Prent’s motion for an
    extension of time to file her notice of appeal.
    Prent’s notice of appeal, filed on August 22, 2016, was untimely. Without a
    timely filed notice of appeal, this Court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. See TEX.
    R. APP. P. 25.1; see also Cartmill v. Cartmill, No. 14-06-00583-CV, 
    2006 WL 2164721
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 3, 2006, pet. denied) (mem.
    op.) (citing In re A.L.B., 
    56 S.W.3d 651
    , 652 (Tex. App.—Waco 2003, no pet.)) (“If
    the notice is untimely, then the court of appeals can take no action other than to
    dismiss the proceeding.”).      Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of
    jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). And we dismiss all other pending motions
    as moot.
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Keyes, and Brown.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-16-00666-CV

Filed Date: 9/22/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/24/2016