Sogo Industries, LLC and Satishchandra Varma v. Tarquin Polymers & Colors, Inc. ( 2021 )

Opinion issued June 29, 2021
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-20-00200-CV
———————————
SOGO INDUSTRIES, LLC AND SATISHCHANDRA VARMA, Appellants
V.
TARQUIN POLYMERS & COLORS, INC., Appellee
On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 1
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1125848
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellants, Sogo Industries, LLC and Satishchandra Varma, filed a notice of
appeal from the trial court’s October 25, 2019 final judgment and January 22, 2020
order denying appellants’ motion for new trial.1
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
On June 7, 2021, appellee, Tarquin Polymers & Colors, Inc., filed a motion to
dismiss appellants’ appeal for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that appellants’ notice of
appeal was not timely filed. More than ten days have passed since appellee filed its
motion to dismiss, and appellants have not responded. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.3(a).
Absent a timely filed notice of appeal, we lack jurisdiction over an appeal.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1. Generally, a notice of appeal of a final judgment must be
filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1.
However, where a party timely files a motion for new trial, the deadline to file a
notice of appeal is extended to ninety days after the judgment is signed. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 26.1(a)(1). Here, after entry of the October 25, 2019 final judgment,
appellants timely filed a motion for new trial. Accordingly, any notice of appeal was
due to be filed on or before January 23, 2020. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(1).
1
Although the trial court signed an order denying appellants’ motion for new trial on
January 22, 2020, appellants’ motion for new trial was overruled by operation of
law on January 8, 2020. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 329b(c) (motion for new trial is
overruled by operation of law if trial court does not sign order ruling on motion
within seventy-five days after judgment is signed).
2
Further, the time within which to file a notice of appeal may be enlarged if,
within fifteen days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal, the party files a
notice of appeal in the trial court and motion for extension of time, complying with
Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.5(b), in the appellate court. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 10.5(b), 26.3. Taking this fifteen-day extension into account, appellants’ notice
of appeal, and motion for extension of time to file their notice of appeal, was due to
be filed no later than February 7, 2020.
Appellants filed their notice of appeal on February 10, 2020. Accordingly,
because appellants failed to file a timely notice of appeal, we lack jurisdiction over
their appeal of the trial court’s October 25, 2019 final judgment. See Gantt v. Gantt,
208 S.W.3d 27, 30 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, pet. denied) (untimely
notice of appeal fails to invoke jurisdiction of appellate court).
Additionally, this Court generally has jurisdiction only over appeals from final
judgments and specific interlocutory orders that the legislature has designated as
appealable orders. See CMH Homes v. Perez, 340 S.W.3d 444, 447–48 (Tex. 2011);
see also TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014. As noted above, in addition
to the trial court’s October 25, 2019 final judgment, appellants also appeal from the
trial court’s order denying their motion for new trial. However, “[n]o appeal from
an order denying a motion for new trial exists separately from an appeal of the
underlying judgment.” Cornwell v. Cornwell, No. 02-17-00105-CV, 2017 WL
36759031, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Dec. 28, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.); Macklin
v. Saia Motor Freight Lines, Inc., No. 06-12-00038-CV, 2012 WL 1155141, at *1
(Tex. App.—Texarkana Apr. 6, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal for
lack of jurisdiction because an “order denying a motion for reconsideration or
motion for new trial is not a judgment, and is not independently appealable”).
Here, because appellants failed to timely file a notice of appeal of the trial
court’s October 15, 2019 final judgment, we also lack jurisdiction to consider an
appeal of the trial court’s order denying appellants’ motion for new trial, because the
order denying the motion for new trial “is not independently appealable.” See
Macklin, 2012 WL 1155141, at *1.
Accordingly, we grant appellee’s motion, and dismiss the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). All pending motions are dismissed
as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Guerra, and Farris.
4