Elizabeth Chandini Portteus v. David Dawson ( 2024 )

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-24-00430-CV
___________________________
ELIZABETH CHANDINI PORTTEUS, Appellant
V.
DAVID DAWSON, Appellee
On Appeal from the 16th District Court
Denton County, Texas
Trial Court No. 23-2131-16
Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.
Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Elizabeth Chandini Portteus, appearing pro se, attempts to appeal
from the trial court’s “Order Granting Judgment-Creditors’s [sic] Motion to Compel
and for Monetary Sanctions.” The trial court’s order was signed on September 15,
2023, but the notice of appeal was not filed until over a year later on September, 24,
2024.
On October 1, 2024, we sent the parties a letter stating that the court was
concerned that it might not have jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of
appeal was not timely filed. We stated that unless Portteus or any party desiring to
continue the appeal filed with the court, on or before October 11, 2024, a response
showing grounds for doing so, this appeal could be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3. Portteus filed a response, but it does not show
grounds for continuing the appeal. 1
The time for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional in this court, and absent a
timely filed notice of appeal or extension request, we must dismiss the appeal. See
Tex. R. App. P. 2, 25.1(b), 26.3; Jones v. City of Houston, 976 S.W.2d 676, 677 (Tex.
1998); Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Because the notice of
Portteus’s response asks us to extend the time for filing her notice of appeal
1
under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.3, but her request is untimely, and even if
it were not, Rule 26.3 allows us to extend the notice’s deadline by fifteen days—not a
year. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3.
2
appeal was untimely, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App.
P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).2
Per Curiam
Delivered: October 17, 2024
After Portteus responded to our jurisdiction letter, she filed a motion to stay
2
enforcement of the judgment. Having dismissed her appeal for lack of jurisdiction,
that motion is now moot.
3