Opinion issued July 29, 2010
|
|
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
NO. 01B09B00552BCV
MIKE MATTHEWS, Appellant
V.
MICKI KERN, Appellee
On Appeal from the 300th District Court
Brazoria County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 50578
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Mike Matthews, appeals the trial court=s judgment. Because appellant did not timely file his notice of appeal, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
The trial court rendered a final judgment on May 6, 2009. Appellant did not file a motion for new trial, or other post-trial motion or pleading to extend the appellate timetable for filing the notice of appeal from 30 days to 90 days after the trial court signed the final judgment. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a)(1). Appellants filed their notice of appeal on June 15, 2010, 40 days after the filing deadline. Because appellant’s notice was untimely, the Clerk of this court notified appellants that their notice of appeal was untimely filed, that under Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997), a motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal is implied, but that under Jones v. City of Houston, 976 S.W.2d 676, 677 (Tex. 1998), they still needed to provide a reasonable explanation for their late filing of their notice of appeal. Our Clerk=s notice gave appellants 10 days from the July1, 2010 notice to provide a reasonable explanation for the late filing of the notice of appeal, advising that if no such explanation was given, the appeal was subject to dismissal by our Court.
The deadline to provide the reasonable explanation for untimely filing the notice of appeal has passed. More than 10 days since the sending of the notice have passed, but we have received no response from appellants. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a); Chilkewitz v. Winter, M.D., 25 S.W.3d 382, 383 (Tex. App.CFort Worth 2000, no pet.) (even though appellant filed his notice of appeal within 15 days after the deadline to file the notice of appeal, court dismissed appeal for want of jurisdiction because, after notification to do so, appellant did not provide a reasonable explanation for untimely filing his notice of appeal).
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Alcala, and Massengale.