Court Opinion

ID: 9384284
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-03 08:11:07.535971+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:52.189793
License: Public Domain

In the
                     Court of Appeals
             Second Appellate District of Texas
                      at Fort Worth
                   ___________________________
                        No. 02-23-00034-CV
                   ___________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF R.Y., D.Y., S.Y., Z.Y., S.Y., AND A.Y., CHILDREN

                On Appeal from the 325th District Court
                        Tarrant County, Texas
                    Trial Court No. 325-675205-20

               Before Womack, Wallach, and Walker, JJ.
               Memorandum Opinion by Justice Womack
                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant M.Y. (Father) attempts to appeal from the trial court’s “Corrected

Order in Suit Establishing the Parent–Child Relationship, in Suit for Modification and

Order Confirming Support Obligation After Motion to Modify[,] Correct[,] or

Reform Judgment” signed on November 7, 2022 (the Corrected Order). Father’s

notice of appeal was due on December 7, 2022—thirty days after the Corrected Order

was signed.1 See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. But Father did not file his notice of appeal

until February 7, 2023, making it untimely. See id.

      On March 1, 2023, we notified the parties by letter of our concern that we lack

jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal was untimely. See id.; In re

K.M.Z., 178 S.W.3d 432, 433 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005, no pet.) (explaining that

“[t]he timely filing of a notice of appeal is jurisdictional in this court”). We warned

that we could dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction unless Father or any party

wanting to continue the appeal filed a response by March 13, 2023, showing grounds

      1
          Father suggests that he had ninety days from the signing of the Corrected
Order to file his notice of appeal, ostensibly pointing to the fact that the trial court
had granted in part his October 13, 2022 motion to modify a previous final order
made by the trial court. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a)(2) (providing that “the notice of
appeal must be filed within 90 days after the judgment is signed if any party timely
files . . . a motion to modify the judgment”). But that motion to modify concerned a
different order by the trial court and was filed almost a month before the Corrected
Order was signed—seemingly being the impetus for the “corrected” nature of that
order—and it has no bearing on Father’s thirty-day deadline to appeal the Corrected
Order. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b(h) (“If a judgment is modified, corrected or reformed
in any respect, the time for appeal shall run from the time the modified, corrected, or
reformed judgment is signed.”).

                                           2
for continuing the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). On March 13, 2023,

we received Father’s “Motion to [R]etain [C]ase on Docket,” which we construe as a

response to our jurisdiction letter.      That response does not show grounds for

continuing the appeal. Because Father’s notice of appeal was untimely, and because

he has not shown grounds for continuing his appeal, we dismiss it for want of

jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

                                                      /s/ Dana Womack

                                                      Dana Womack
                                                      Justice

Delivered: March 30, 2023

                                             3