Willie Burleson v. Lula Schuler, Portia Vidrine, William C. Burleson, Shirley Miller ( 2023 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-23-00874-CV
Willie BURLESON,
Appellant
v.
Lula SCHULER, Portia Vidrine, William C. Burleson, Shirley Miller,
Appellees
From the 2nd 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas
Trial Court No. 20-1102-CV-A
Honorable William D. Old III, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Delivered and Filed: December 20, 2023
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
The trial court signed a final judgment on August 22, 2023. The notice of appeal was due
on September 21, 2023. See TEX. R. APP. P. 4.1, 26.1. A motion for extension of time to file the
notice of appeal was due on October 6, 2023. See id. R. 26.3. Although appellant filed a notice
of appeal on September 27, 2023, 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
04-23-00874-CV
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); see also Hone v. Hanafin, 104 S.W.3d 884, 886–87 (Tex.
2003) (holding “a reasonable explanation” is any plausible statement of circumstances indicating
that failure to timely file was not deliberate or intentional but was the result of inadvertence,
mistake or mischance, and that “any conduct short of deliberate or intentional noncompliance
qualifies as inadvertence, mistake or mischance”) (citation omitted). This court ordered appellant
to show cause in writing by November 20, 2023, why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack
of jurisdiction. We advised appellant that failure to respond timely would result in dismissal of
this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). Appellant has not responded to date.
Accordingly, because appellant did not provide a reasonable explanation for failure to file
a timely notice of appeal, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3,
10.5(b)(1)(C), 42.3(b), (c); Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 615.
PER CURIAM
-2-