Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 10, 2004.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-04-00358-CV
______________
WILLIAM NORRIS, EDWARD ROSSI, STEVEN HALPERN,
JIMMY O. PAYNE, and SUE PACKWOOD, Appellants
V.
THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE PUBLISHING COMPANY, Appellee
On Appeal from the 127th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 02-32598
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
This is an appeal from an amended judgment signed December 19, 2003. Appellants filed a timely motion for new trial. The notice of appeal was due March 18, 2004. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. Appellants filed their notice of appeal on March 31, 2004, a date within fifteen days of the due date for the notice of appeal. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (holding that a motion for extension of time is Anecessarily implied@ when the perfecting instrument is filed within fifteen days of its due date). Appellants did not file a motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal. While an extension may be implied, appellants are still obligated to come forward with a reasonable explanation to support the late filing. See Miller v. Greenpark Surgery Center Assocs., Ltd., 974 S.W.2d 805, 808 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.).
On May 13, 2004, we ordered appellants to file a proper motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal on or before May 24, 2004. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3;10.5(b). Appellee also filed a motion to dismiss the appeal because the notice of appeal was untimely and no motion for extension of time had been filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Appellants did not file a motion for extension of time or otherwise respond to this court=s order or appellee=s motion. Accordingly, appellee=s motion is granted.
We, therefore, dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.
PER CURIAM
Memorandum Opinion filed June 10, 2004.
Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Frost and Guzman.