in the Interest of L.S.S. A/K/A L.H., N.A.H and N.L.H. A/K/A N.L.H.

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided April 20, 2012·No. 14-12-00270-CV·Published

Opinion

Order filed April 20, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-12-00270-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L.S.S. A/K/A L.H., N.A.H. AND N.L.H. A/K/A N.L.H., Children

On Appeal from the 314th District Court Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2011-00603J

ORDER

This is an accelerated appeal from a judgment in a suit in which the termination of the parent-child relationship is at issue (“parental termination case”). Appellant's brief was due April 19, 2012. No brief has been filed.

Unless appellant files a brief with the clerk of this court within 10 days of the date of this order, the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

Further, the judgment was signed February 24, 2012. The notice of appeal was due March 15, 2012. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(b). Appellant, however, filed his notice of appeal on March 20, 2012, a date within 15 days of the due date for the notice of appeal. A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when the perfecting instrument is filed within

fifteen days of its due date. Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Appellant did not file a motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal. While an extension may be implied, appellant is still obligated to come forward with a reasonable explanation to support the late filing. See Miller v. Greenpark Surgery Center Assocs., Ltd., 974 S.W.2d 805, 808 (Tex. App. -- Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.).

On April 2, 2012, appellant was ordered to file a proper motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal on or before April 12, 2012. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3;10.5(b). As of this date, no motion has been filed.

Accordingly, we ORDER appellant to file a proper motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal on or before 10 days after the date of this order. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3;10.5(b). If appellant does not comply with this order, we will dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.

PER CURIAM

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

in the Interest of L.S.S. A/K/A L.H., N.A.H and N.L.H. A/K/A N.L.H., (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

in the Interest of L.S.S. A/K/A L.H., N.A.H and N.L.H. A/K/A N.L.H. (in the Interest of L.S.S. A/K/A L.H., N.A.H and N.L.H. A/K/A N.L.H.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Verburgt v. Dorner
959 S.W.2d 615 (Texas Supreme Court, 1998)
Miller v. Greenpark Surgery Center Associates, Ltd.
974 S.W.2d 805 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998)