NO. 12-17-00233-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

JOHN FORRESTER, 

APPELLANT

V.

RON MEISSNER AND CONNIE 

MEISSNER,

APPELLEES

§

§

§

APPEAL FROM THE 115TH 

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

UPSHUR COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

This appeal is being dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The trial court’s judgment was 

signed on April 12, 2017. Under the rules of appellate procedure, the notice of appeal must be 

filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1. Appellant filed a 

motion for new trial on May 12. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). Thus, Appellant’s notice of appeal 

was due on or before July 11. Appellant filed his notice of appeal on July 17, thus, it was 

untimely.

Rule 26.3 provides that a motion to extend the time for filing a notice of appeal must be 

filed within fifteen days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. 

On July 28, this Court notified Appellant that the information received in this appeal does not 

show the jurisdiction of this Court, i.e., there is no timely notice of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P.

26.1, 37.1. However, Appellant was further notified that, pursuant to Rule 26.3 and Verburgt v. 

Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615 (Tex. 1997), we would imply a motion to extend time for filing the 

notice of appeal. We informed Appellant that Rule 26.3 requires a motion complying with Rule 

10.5(b). See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b), 26.3(b). Thus, we notified Appellant that the appeal would 

be dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless on or before August 7, 2017, Appellant informed this 

Court, in writing, of facts that reasonably explained his need for an extension of time to file the 
2

notice of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3. The deadline for responding to this Court’s notice 

has expired, and Appellant has not responded to the notice.

Because this court is not authorized to extend the time for perfecting an appeal except as 

provided by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and 26.3, the appeal is dismissed for want 

of jurisdiction.

1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). 

Opinion delivered August 9, 2017.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(PUBLISH)

 

1 We also note that, on July 28, 2017, the clerk of this Court notified Appellant that the filing fee in this 

appeal is due. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5. Appellant was informed that failure to remit the filing fee on or before August 

7, 2017, would result in the Court’s taking appropriate action, including dismissal of the case without further notice. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). The date for remitting the filing fee has passed, and Appellant has not complied with 

the Court’s request. Thus, Appellant’s appeal is also subject to dismissal for failure, after notice, to comply with 

Rule 5. See id.
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

AUGUST 9, 2017

NO. 12-17-00233-CV

JOHN FORRESTER,

Appellant

V.

RON MEISSNER AND CONNIE MEISSNER,

Appellees

Appeal from the 115th District Court 

of Upshur County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 16-00056)

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the appellate record, and the same 

being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that it is without jurisdiction of the appeal, and 

that the appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that 

this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction; and that this decision 

be certified to the court below for observance.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.