NUMBER 13-15-00282-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
TERESIA O’RILEY, Appellant,
v.
THOMAS REX FOREHAND, Appellee.
____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 36th District Court
of Bee County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Teresia O’Riley, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment
rendered against her in trial court cause number B-12-1092-CV-A in the 36th District
Court of Bee County, Texas. A final “take-nothing” judgment was rendered against
appellant on May 19, 2015 on her claims for breach of contract and deceptive trade
practices in favor of appellee, Thomas Rex Forehand. We dismiss the appeal for want
of jurisdiction.
Appellant filed her notice of appeal in this cause on June 25, 2015. On June 30,
2015, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that the appeal was not
timely perfected. Appellant was advised that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect
was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court’s directive. More
than ten days have passed, and appellant has not responded to the Court’s notice.
Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1 provides that an appeal is perfected when
notice of appeal is filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed, unless a timely and
appropriate post-judgment motion has been filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(4). Where a
post-judgment motion has been filed, notice of appeal shall be filed within ninety days
after the judgment is signed. Id.
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, 617–619 (1997) (construing the predecessor
to Rule 26). However, appellant must provide a reasonable explanation for the late filing:
it is not enough to simply file a notice of appeal. Id.; Woodard v. Higgins, 140 S.W.3d
462, 462 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2004, no pet.); In re B.G., 104 S.W.3d 565, 567 (Tex.
App.—Waco 2002, no pet.).
Based upon the record before the Court, appellant’s notice of appeal was due thirty
days after the May 19, 2015 judgment was rendered. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(4).
Accordingly, appellant’s appeal was due on June 18, 2015. See id. Appellant filed her
2
notice of appeal on June 22, 2015; within the period of time in which we imply a motion
for extension of time. See Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617–19. However, appellant has
failed to provide an explanation for the late filing. Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction over
this appeal. See id.; Woodard, 140 S.W.3d at 462.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file,
appellant’s failure to timely perfect her appeal, and appellant’s failure to respond to this
Court’s notice, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF
JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a),(c).
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the 1st
day of September, 2015.
3