Herman Adams v. MacLamar Management ( 2018 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-17-00851-CV
Herman ADAMS,
Appellant
v.
MACLAMAR MANAGEMENT,
Appellee
From the County Court at Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2017CV04194
Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: January 31, 2018
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
The trial court signed a final judgment on November 16, 2017. Because appellant did not
file a motion for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion for reinstatement, or request
for findings of fact and conclusions of law, the notice of appeal was due to be filed on December
16, 2017. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal
was due on December 31, 2017. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. 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.
04-17-00851-CV
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 Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 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). 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).
We, therefore, ordered appellant to file a response presenting a reasonable explanation for
failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. We warned that if appellant failed to respond
within the time provided, the appeal would be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). Appellant
failed to respond. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed.
PER CURIAM
-2-