|
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
|
NO. 02-13-00018-CV
|
Steve McDaniel and Ginger McDaniel
v.
Larry Miller, as judge of the Municipal Court; Sherrill Johnson, as Court Administrator; and Matthew C.G. Boyle, as Town Attorney for the Municipal Court of the Town of Argyle, Texas |
§
§
§
§
§
§
|
From the 16th District Court
of Denton County (2012-10603-16)
March 21, 2013
Per Curiam |
JUDGMENT
This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
PER CURIAM
|
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
|
NO. 02-13-00018-CV
|
Steve McDaniel and Ginger McDaniel |
|
APPELLANTS |
|
V.
|
||
|
Larry Miller, as judge of the Municipal Court; Sherrill Johnson, as Court Administrator; and Matthew C.G. Boyle, as Town Attorney for the Municipal Court of the Town of Argyle, Texas |
|
APPELLEES |
----------
FROM THE 16th District Court OF Denton COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]
----------
Appellants Steve McDaniel and Ginger McDaniel attempt to appeal from an order granting a plea to the jurisdiction. The trial court granted the plea on September 27, 2012, and Appellants filed a motion to reinstate on October 30, 2012; Appellants’ notice of appeal was therefore due December 26, 2012, but was not filed until January 11, 2013.[2] See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a)(3). We notified Appellants of our concern that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal was not timely filed, and we informed them that the appeal would be dismissed unless they, or any party desiring to continue the appeal, filed with the court, on or before February 8, 2013, a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. We have not received a response. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).
PER CURIAM
PANEL: MEIER, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GABRIEL, J.
DELIVERED: March 21, 2013
[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
[2]Appellants appear to have complied with rule of civil procedure 5 in filing their motion to reinstate. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 5.