Debbi Lofton v. Milton Soward

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 27, 2015
Docket12-15-00028-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Debbi Lofton v. Milton Soward (Debbi Lofton v. Milton Soward) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Debbi Lofton v. Milton Soward, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

NO. 12-15-00028-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

DEBBI LOFTON, § APPEAL FROM THE 402ND APPELLANT

V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

MILTON SOWARD, APPELLEE § WOOD COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for want of jurisdiction pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(a). The trial court’s judgment was signed on December 22, 2014. Under rule of appellate procedure 26.1, the notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed. Appellant did not file a motion for new trial. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a) (providing that notice of appeal must be filed within ninety days after judgment signed if any party timely files motion for new trial). Therefore, her notice of appeal was due to have been filed no later than January 21, 2015. Appellant did not file her notice of appeal until February 2, 2015. Because the notice of appeal was not filed on or before January 21, 2015, it was untimely. On February 4, 2015, this Court notified Appellant, pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 37.1 and 42.3, that her notice of appeal was untimely, but that this Court would imply a motion to extend the time for filing the notice of appeal. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 615 (Tex. 1997). Appellant was further informed that the appeal would be dismissed unless, on or before February 16, 2015, she informed the Court in writing of facts that reasonably explain her need for an extension of time to file the notice of appeal. The deadline for responding to this Court’s notice has expired, and Appellant has not responded to the notice. Because this Court is not authorized to extend the time for perfecting an appeal except as provided by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and 26.3, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Opinion delivered February 27, 2015. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(PUBLISH)

2 COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

FEBRUARY 27, 2015

DEBBI LOFTON, Appellant V. MILTON SOWARD, Appellee

Appeal from the 402nd District Court of Wood County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 2014-550)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that this court is without jurisdiction of the appeal, and that the appeal should be dismissed. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Verburgt v. Dorner
959 S.W.2d 615 (Texas Supreme Court, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Debbi Lofton v. Milton Soward, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/debbi-lofton-v-milton-soward-texapp-2015.