DISMISS and Opinion Filed July 1, 2021
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-21-00264-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF M.C. AND J.C., CHILDREN
On Appeal from the 302nd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DF-10-03756-U
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Carlyle
Opinion by Justice Schenck
Appellant appeals from the trial court’s October 12, 2016 Order on Notice of
Changed Status signed by an IV-D associate judge. We questioned our jurisdiction
over the appeal because appellant filed his notice of appeal over four years after the
order was signed. At the Court’s request, the parties filed letter briefs addressing
our concern.
The record before the Court reflects that appellant did not timely request a de
novo hearing from the referring court within three working days of the date of the
IV-D associate judge’s order. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 201.1042(b). In the
absence of a timely request for a de novo hearing, the IV-D associate judge’s
proposed order automatically became the referring court’s order by operation of law
on October 17, 2016. See id. § 201.1041(a); Office of the Attorney Gen. of Tex. v.
C.W.H., 531 S.W.3d 178, 182 (Tex. 2017). Under these circumstances, the notice
of appeal was due November 16, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P.26.1; In re D.J.L., No.
05-10-00203-CV, 2010 WL 3636327, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Sept. 21, 2010, no
pet.) (calculating plenary power deadlines using date associate judge’s proposed
order became the order of the referring court by operation of law). Without a timely
filed notice of appeal, this Court lacks jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(b);
Brashear v. Victoria Gardens of McKinney, LLC, 302 S.W.3d 542, 545 (Tex. App.—
Dallas 2009, no pet.) (op. on reh’g) (timely filing of notice of appeal is
jurisdictional).
Although appellant filed several letter briefs, he fails to demonstrate this
Court’s jurisdiction over the appeal. Appellant asserts that this Court has jurisdiction
to review the child support order because the trial court failed to make mandatory
findings as to why it allegedly deviated from the child support guidelines. See TEX.
FAM. CODE ANN. § 154.130(a)(3) (findings required when amount of child support
ordered varies from amount computed by applying statutory percentage guidelines).
That provision does not give this Court jurisdiction of an otherwise untimely appeal.
Additionally, appellant asserts that the associate judge committed fraud by
signing an allegedly false and inaccurate order. In that circumstance, appellant
further asserts, the deadline for filing an appeal should not apply. We disagree. Any
alleged fraud does not render the deadline for filing a notice of appeal
–2–
inapplicable. The only circumstance in which the time to file a notice of appeal does
not run from the date the judgment is signed is when a party does not get notice of
the judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 4.2(a)(1), (b).
As noted above, this Court’s jurisdiction is dependent upon a timely filed
notice of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(b); Brashear, 302 S.W.3d at 545.
Appellant filed a notice of appeal on April 21, 2021, more than four years past the
deadline. Because this Court lacks jurisdiction, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 42.3(a).
/David J. Schenck/
DAVID J. SCHENCK
JUSTICE
210264F.P05
–3–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
IN THE INTEREST OF M.C. AND On Appeal from the 302nd Judicial
J.C., CHILDREN District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DF-10-03756-
No. 05-21-00264-CV U.
Opinion delivered by Justice
Schenck. Justices Reichek and
Carlyle participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is
DISMISSED.
Judgment entered July 1, 2021
–4–