NUMBER 13-13-00417-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
IN THE INTEREST OF L.E.M., A CHILD
____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 423rd District Court
of Bastrop County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Kacie Miller, attempted to perfect an appeal from orders signed on
November 6, 2012 and May 22, 2013 in the 423rd District Court of Bastrop County in trial
court cause number 423-2364. Her appeal was transferred to this Court from the Third
Court of Appeals by order of the Texas Supreme Court. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. §
22.220(a) (West Supp. 2011) (delineating the jurisdiction of appellate courts); TEX. GOV'T
CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West 2005) (granting the supreme court the authority to transfer
cases from one court of appeals to another at any time that there is “good cause” for the
transfer). We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Appellant’s perfecting document is entitled “Notice of Mandamus Appeal.” On
August 8, 2013, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that: (1) the
orders that she was attempting to appeal were not appealable; (2) the appeal had not
been timely perfected; and (3) the filing did not meet the requirements for original
proceedings under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52. The Clerk of this Court
notified appellant of these defects so that steps could be taken to correct the defects, if it
could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. Appellant was advised that the appeal
would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction if the defects were not corrected within ten
days from the date of receipt of this notice. In response, appellant has filed a “Motion for
Extension of Time to File Mandamus.”
The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s failure to
correct the defects in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for
want of jurisdiction. See id. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF
JURISDICTION. See id. R. 42.3(a),(c). The dismissal of this appeal is without regard
to the merits and is without prejudice to any original proceeding that may ensue.
Appellant’s “Motion for Extension of Time to File Mandamus” is DISMISSED AS MOOT.
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
12th day of September, 2013.
2