Anne Helene Dubois v. Eye Center of Texas, Edward C. Wade, M.D., & Randall Reichle

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 15, 2004

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 15, 2004.

 

 

In The

 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

 

NO. 14-04-00077-CV

____________

 

ANNE-HELENE DUBOIS, Appellant

 

V.

 

EYE CENTER OF TEXAS, EDWARD C. WADE, M.D., and RANDALL REICHLE, Appellees

 

 

On Appeal from the 125th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 03-04443

 

 

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

This is an attempted appeal from a a judgment signed September 25, 2003.  Appellant filed a timely motion for new trial on October 22, 2003.  Appellant=s notice of appeal was filed on January 14, 2004.

When appellant has 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, the notice of appeal must be filed within ninety days after the date the judgment is signed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a).


Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed timely.  The deadline for filing the notice of appeal was December 24, 2003.  Although December 24th is a state holiday, it is not a legal holiday that would extend the filing deadline.  Tex. Gov=t Code Ann. '' 662.003(b), 662.021(2) (Vernon 1994 & Supp. Pamph. 2004). 

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).  Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed within the fifteen-day period provided by Tex. R. App. P. 26.3.

On March 2, 2003, appellees filed a motion to dismiss, asserting that this Court is without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.  Appellant=s response fails to demonstrate that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

 

PER CURIAM

 

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed April 15, 2004.

Panel consists of Justices Fowler, Edelman, and Seymore.