Kyle Trammell v. Kylie Trammell ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                           NUMBER 13-22-00251-CV
    COURT OF APPEALS
    THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
    ____________________________________________________________
    KYLE TRAMMELL,                                                              Appellant,
    v.
    KYLIE TRAMMELL,                                     Appellee.
    ____________________________________________________________
    On appeal from the County Court at Law
    of Aransas County, Texas.
    ____________________________________________________________
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Tijerina
    Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina
    This matter is before the Court on appellant’s handwritten note received on May
    31, 2022, which the Court construes as a motion for extension of time to file a notice of
    appeal. We now dismiss the matter for lack of jurisdiction.
    On April 21, 2021, the trial court signed a final protective order. Appellant filed a
    notice of appeal with the trial court on May 31, 2022. On June 2, 2022, the Clerk of this
    Court notified appellant that it appeared that the appeal was not timely perfected.
    Appellant was advised that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was not corrected
    within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court’s directive.
    Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal is untimely, as it
    was filed more than fifteen days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal. TEX. R.
    APP. P. 26.3. We are to construe the rules of appellate procedure reasonably and liberally
    so that the right to appeal is not lost by imposing requirements not absolutely necessary
    to effectuate the purpose of a rule. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 
    959 S.W.2d 615
    , 616-
    17 (Tex. 1997). Nevertheless, we are prohibited from enlarging the scope of our
    jurisdiction by enlarging the time for perfecting an appeal in a civil case in a manner not
    provided for by rule. See Tex. R. App. P. 2; In re T.W., 
    89 S.W.3d 641
    , 642 (Tex. App.–
    Amarillo 2002, no pet.).
    Appellant’s notice of appeal was untimely, by more than a year, and appellant’s
    motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal is also untimely; therefore, we lack
    jurisdiction over the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss appellant’s motion and entire cause
    for lack of jurisdiction.
    JAIME TIJERINA
    Justice
    Delivered and filed on the
    30th day of June, 2022.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-22-00251-CV

Filed Date: 6/30/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/4/2022