NUMBER 13-15-00371-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

PIERRE ALBERT KINGBURY, Appellant,

v.

JERRY RAY OLIVER AND PRO LOGISTICS, Appellees.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 197th District Court

of Cameron County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Pierre Albert Kingbury, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment 

entered by the 197th District Court of Cameron County, Texas, in cause number 2014-

DCL-05335-C. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

According to the notice of appeal, the judgment subject to appeal in this cause was 

signed on April 30, 2015. Appellant filed his notice of appeal on August 11, 2015. That 
2

same day, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that the appeal was 

not timely perfected. Appellant was advised that the appeal would be dismissed if the 

defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court’s directive. 

In response, appellant filed an amended notice of appeal stating that his motion for new 

trial filed on May 27, 2015 was overruled by operation of law. 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1 provides that an appeal is perfected when 

notice of appeal is filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed, unless a motion for 

new trial is timely filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(1). Where a timely motion for new trial

or motion to reinstate has been filed, notice of appeal shall be filed within ninety days 

after the judgment is signed. Id. R. 26.1(a). 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 period provided by Rule 

26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 

617–18 619 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). However, appellant 

must provide a reasonable explanation for the late filing: it is not enough to simply file a 

notice of appeal. Id.; Woodard v. Higgins, 140 S.W.3d 462, 462 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 

2004, no pet.); In re B.G., 104 S.W.3d 565, 567 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002, no pet.).

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1, appellant’s notice of appeal 

was due on July 29, 2015, but was not filed until August 11, 2015, within the fifteen day 

grace period for filing a motion for extension of time. Appellant was still required, 

however, to offer a reasonable explanation of the need for an extension. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 10.5(b)(1)(C), (b)(2)(A), 26.3(b); Jones v. City of Houston, 976 S.W.2d 676, 677 
3

(Tex. 1998); see also Pasha v. YP Adver., L.P., No. 01-14-00456-CV, 2014 WL 4116456, 

at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 21, 2014, no pet.). Appellant has offered no 

reasonable explanation indicating the need for an extension of time. 

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, is of the 

opinion that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly, we DISMISS the appeal 

for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

31st day of August, 2015.