Carey Johnson v. Jon P Herrera

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 20, 2025
• Docket: 01-24-00407-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued February 20, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00407-CV ——————————— CAREY LYNN JOHNSON, Appellant V. JON HERRERA, Appellee

On Appeal from the 311th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 2018-77006

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Carey Lynn Johnson, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal

from the trial court’s May 14, 2024 “Order in Suit to Modify Parent-Child

Relationship.” Appellant has failed to timely file a brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a)

(governing time to file brief). The record in this appeal was completed on October 2, 2024, making

appellant’s brief due no later than November 1, 2024. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a).

On October 29, 2024, appellant filed her first motion to extend the deadline for filing

her brief. The Court granted appellant’s motion, extending the deadline to file her

brief to December 2, 2024. Appellant failed to timely file a brief, but on December

2, 2024, she filed her second motion to extend the deadline for filing her brief.

In her second motion, appellant requested that the deadline for filing her brief

be extended to December 7, 2024. The Court granted appellant’s motion, but on

December 9, 2024, appellant filed her third motion to extend the deadline for filing

her brief, requesting that the deadline be extended to December 16, 2024. The Court

granted appellant’s motion over the opposition of appellee, Jon Herrera. Appellant

failed to file her brief by the extended deadline.

Accordingly, on January 16, 2025, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant

that the time for filing a brief had expired and the appeal was subject to dismissal

unless a brief, along with a motion to extend time to file a brief, was filed within ten

days of the notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a) (governing failure of appellant to file

brief), 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary dismissal of appeal for want of prosecution),

42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of appeal for failure to comply with notice

from Clerk of Court). Despite the notice that this appeal was subject to dismissal,

appellant did not adequately respond.

2 Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.3(b), (c); 43.2(f). All pending motions are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Caughey, and Morgan.