DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 17, 2016
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-16-00216-CV
JERRY DAVIS, Appellant
V.
DALLAS COUNTY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL
DISTRICT, DALLAS COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT,
DALLAS COUNTY SCHOOL EQUALIZATION FUND,
AND PARKLAND HOSPITAL DISTRICT, Appellees
On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. TX-15-00980
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Myers, Stoddart, and Whitehill
Opinion by Justice Whitehill
Appellant appeals from the trial court’s judgment signed on January 25, 2016. In a letter
dated March 25, 2016, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over the appeal because it appeared
the notice of appeal was untimely. In that correspondence, we noted that the notice of appeal
was filed within fifteen days of the deadline and we instructed appellant that he could cure the
timeliness problem by filing, within ten days, a motion for extension of time to file the notice of
appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. We cautioned appellant that failure to file an extension
motion by April 8, 2016 may result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. As of
today’s date, appellant has not filed an extension motion.
If no post-judgment motion extending the appellate timetable is filed, a notice of appeal
is due thirty days after the date the judgment is signed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. An extension
of time may be granted if an appellant files a notice of appeal within fifteen days of the deadline
and files a motion complying with rule of appellate procedure 10.5(b). See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3,
10.5(b). Without a timely filed notice of appeal, this Court lacks jurisdiction. Tex. R. App. P.
25.1(b).
The trial court signed the judgment on January 25, 2016. Appellant did not file any post-
judgment motion extending the appellate deadline. Accordingly, the notice of appeal was due on
February 24, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1. Appellant filed his notice of appeal on February
25, 2016, one day past the deadline. Although given an opportunity to cure the timeliness
problem by filing a motion for extension, appellant has failed to do so. Accordingly, we dismiss
the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
/Bill Whitehill/
BILL WHITEHILL
JUSTICE
160216F.P05
–2–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
JERRY DAVIS, Appellant On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District
Court, Dallas County, Texas.
No. 05-16-00216-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. TX-15-00980.
Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill.
DALLAS COUNTY, CITY OF DALLAS, Justices Myers and Stoddart participating.
DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL
DISTRICT, DALLAS COUNTY
COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT,
DALLAS COUNTY SCHOOL
EQUALIZATION FUND, AND
PARKLAND HOSPITAL DISTRICT,
Appellees
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.
It is ORDERED that appellees DALLAS COUNTY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, DALLAS COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT, DALLAS COUNTY SCHOOL EQUALIZATION FUND, AND PARKLAND
HOSPITAL DISTRICT recover their costs of this appeal from appellant JERRY DAVIS.
Judgment entered May 17, 2016.
–3–