Court Opinion

ID: 9895203
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-06 13:11:58.501403+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:44.128450
License: Public Domain

In the
        Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
         at Fort Worth
    ___________________________
         No. 02-23-00357-CV
    ___________________________

   CARL DAVID PASCHAL, Appellant

                    V.

        TRENT JONES, Appellee

  On Appeal from the 16th District Court
        Denton County, Texas
      Trial Court No. 22-2722-16

  Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.
    Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant Carl David Paschal attempts to appeal from the trial court’s

interlocutory order granting Appellee Trent Jones’s plea to the jurisdiction. The trial

court signed the interlocutory order on July 10, 2023, making Paschal’s notice of

appeal due July 31, 2023. See Tex. R. App. P. 4.1(a) (stating that if the final day of a

period prescribed by the rules falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period

prescribed extends to the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday),

26.1(b) (stating that a notice of appeal in an accelerated appeal must be filed within

twenty days after the judgment or order signed), 28.1(a) (stating that appeals from

interlocutory orders are accelerated appeals). Paschal filed his notice of appeal on

September 29, 2023, sixty days late.

      On October 3, 2023, we notified Paschal of our concern that we lacked

jurisdiction over this appeal because his notice of appeal was untimely. We warned

that we would dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction unless he or any party

desiring to continue the appeal filed a response by October 13, 2023, showing a

reasonable explanation for the late filing of the notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P.

10.5(b), 26.3(b), 42.3(a), 43.2(f). We have received no response.

      The time for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional, and absent a timely filed

notice of appeal or motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal, we must

dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. 2, 25.1(b), 26.1, 26.3, 28.1(b); Jones v. City of

                                           2
Houston, 976 S.W.2d 676, 677 (Tex. 1998); Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617

(Tex. 1997).

      Because Paschal’s notice of appeal was sixty days late, we dismiss the appeal for

want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); Jones, 976 S.W.2d at 677;

Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617; Bhakta v. Tex. Dep’t of Transp., No. 04-14-00063-CV, 2014

WL 1499810, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Apr. 16, 2014, no pet.) (per curiam)

(mem. op.) (dismissing appeal for lack of jurisdiction because notice of appeal was not

filed within twenty days of trial court’s order granting appellee’s plea to the

jurisdiction and motion for extension was not filed within the fifteen-day extension

period).

                                                     Per Curiam

Delivered: November 2, 2023

                                          3