Christopher Spates and Prodigy Services v. ENI US Operating Company

Order filed November 13, 2014
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-14-00741-CV
____________
CHRISTOPHER SPATES AND PRODIGY SERVICES, Appellants
V.
ENI US OPERATING COMPANY, Appellee
On Appeal from the 234th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 2012-35849
ORDER
This is an appeal from a judgment signed July 28, 2014. The notice of
appeal was due August 27, 2014. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. Appellant, however,
filed his notice of appeal on September 11, 2014, a date within 15 days of the due
date for the notice of appeal. A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied
when the perfecting instrument is filed within fifteen days of its due date. Verburgt
v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Appellant did not file a motion to
extend time to file the notice of appeal in this court.1 While an extension may be
implied, appellant is still obligated to come forward with a reasonable explanation
to support the late filing. See Miller v. Greenpark Surgery Center Assocs., Ltd.,
974 S.W.2d 805, 808 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.).
Accordingly, we ORDER appellant to file a proper motion to extend time to
file the notice of appeal on or before 10 days after the date of this order. See Tex.
R. App. P. 26.3;10.5(b). If appellant does not comply with this order, we will
dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.
PER CURIAM
1
There is a motion contained in the clerk’s record.