Court Opinion

ID: 2933069
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-15 02:38:04.858408+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:55:29.093464
License: Public Domain

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 6, 2007

Dismissed
and Memorandum Opinion filed September 6, 2007.
 
In The
 
Fourteenth Court of
Appeals
____________
 
NO. 14-07-00266-CV
____________
 
IN THE INTEREST OF K.B.F., N.S.F.,
and T.J.F.
 
 
 

 
On Appeal from the 310th District
Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No.
2006-57228
 

 
M E M O R
A N D U M   O P I N I O N
This is an attempted appeal from a judgment signed January
29, 2007.  A combined motion for new trial and notice of appeal was filed on
March 23, 2007.  Because the motion for new trial was filed more than thirty
days after the judgment was signed, the motion for new trial was untimely.
The notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after
the judgment 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

Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed timely. 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 9 (1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26).  However, the
appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of
appeal in a timely manner.  See Tex.
R. App. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C); Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617-18. 
Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed within the
fifteen-day period provided by rule 26.3
On August 14, 2007, notification was transmitted to all
parties of the Court=s intent to dismiss the appeal for want of
jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App.
P. 42.3(a).  Appellant filed no response. 
Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.
 
PER CURIAM
 
Judgment rendered and Memorandum
Opinion filed September 6, 2007.
Panel consists of Justices Yates, Seymore, and Guzman.