Carlos & Emily Enterprises, Inc., and Carlos Garcia, Individually, D/B/A Express International v. Jose Luis Martinez

NUMBER 13-14-00578-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
CARLOS & EMILY ENTERPRISES,
INC., AND CARLOS GARCIA,
INDIVIDUALLY, D/B/A EXPRESS
INTERNATIONAL, Appellants,
v.
JOSE LUIS MARTINEZ, Appellee.
____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 8
of Hidalgo County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellants, Carlos & Emily Enterprises, Inc., and Carlos Garcia, Individually, d/b/a
Express International, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the
County Court at Law No. 8 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in trial court cause number CL-09-
0030-H. Judgment in this cause was signed on June 16, 2014. Appellants filed a notice
of appeal on September 22, 2014, stating that a motion to extend post judgment deadlines
was pending in the trial court. On October 17, 2014, this Court abated the appeal and
remanded to the trial court for proceedings in accordance with Texas Rule of Civil
Procedure 306a. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 306a. A supplemental record containing the trial
court’s findings has been filed and accordingly this appeal is REINSTATED.
Absent a timely filed notice of appeal from a final judgment or recognized
interlocutory order, we do not have jurisdiction over an appeal. See Lehmann v. Har-
Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). The notice of appeal must be filed within
thirty days after the judgment or other appealable order is signed when appellant has not
filed a timely motion for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion to reinstate, or
request for findings of fact and conclusion of law. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1.
Rule 306a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure provides that if within twenty days
after a judgment is signed, a party adversely affected by it has neither received the
required notice nor acquired actual knowledge of the judgment, then appellate deadlines
shall begin to run from the date that such party received notice or acquired actual
knowledge of the rendition of judgment. TEX. R. CIV. P. 306a(4); see also TEX. R. APP.
P. 4.2(a). In order to establish the application of the rule, the adversely affected party
must prove in the trial court on sworn motion and notice the date on which the party first
received notice of the judgment or acquired actual knowledge of it and that this date was
more than twenty days after it was signed. TEX. R. CIV. P. 306a(5); TEX. R. APP. P. 4.2(b).
After hearing the motion, the trial court must sign a written order that finds the date when
2
the party first received notice or acquired actual knowledge of the signing of the judgment.
TEX. R. APP. P. 4.2(c).
The trial court conducted a hearing and denied appellants’ motion to extend post
judgment deadlines to August 28, 2014. The trial court concluded that appellants first
received notice of the signed final judgment on June 17, 2014, and first acquired actual
knowledge of the final judgment on July 31, 2014.
In this case, the trial court found that appellant received notice of the final judgment
within 20 days after the judgment was signed. Accordingly, rule 306a(4) is inapplicable.
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1, appellants’ notice of appeal was
due on July 16, 2014, but was not filed until September 22, 2014. The Court, having
examined and fully considered the documents on file and appellants’ failure to timely
perfect their appeal, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
22nd day of January, 2015.
3