In the Interest of M.C.J. and E.J.J., Children v. the State of Texas
This text of In the Interest of M.C.J. and E.J.J., Children v. the State of Texas (In the Interest of M.C.J. and E.J.J., Children v. the State of Texas) 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.
Opinion
NUMBER 13-25-00540-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
IN THE INTEREST OF M.C.J. AND E.J.J., CHILDREN
ON APPEAL FROM THE 267TH DISTRICT COURT OF VICTORIA COUNTY, TEXAS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Silva, Peña, and West Memorandum Opinion by Justice Silva
This matter is before the Court on its own motion. On October 22, 2025, appellant
J.S. 1 filed a notice of appeal attempting to appeal an order terminating her parental rights
to her children in trial court cause number 24-08-91475-C. On September 23, 2025, the
trial court signed an amended order of termination. On October 24, 2025, the Court
1 To protect the identities of the children subject to this suit, we refer to the children and their relatives by initials and pseudonyms. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 109.002(d); TEX. R. APP. P. 9.8(b)(2). notified appellant that it appeared that the appeal was not timely perfected. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 26.1(b). Appellant was advised that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect
was not corrected. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3, 37.3, 42.3(a), (c).
In suits where the termination of parental rights is in issue, an appeal of a final
order is governed by the rules for accelerated appeals in civil cases. See TEX. FAM. CODE
ANN. §§ 109.002(a), 263.405(a); TEX. R. APP. P. 28.4. In such suits the notice of appeal
is due twenty days after the judgment is signed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b). Post-trial motions
or requests for findings of fact or conclusions of law do not extend the deadline to perfect
the appeal. Id. R. 28.1(b). The appellate court may extend the time to file the notice of
appeal if, within fifteen days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal, the party files
the notice of appeal in the trial court and files in the appellate court a motion for extension
of time that complies with the appellate rules. Id. R. 26.3; see In re K.A.F., 160 S.W.3d
923, 926–27 (Tex. 2005). However, we are prohibited from enlarging the scope of our
jurisdiction by enlarging the time for perfecting an appeal in a civil case in a manner not
provided for by rule. See TEX. R. APP. P. 2; In re T.W., 89 S.W.3d 641, 642 (Tex. App.—
Amarillo 2002, no pet.).
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, 617–18, 619 (1997) (construing the
predecessor to Rule 26). Here, appellant’s notice of appeal was filed within the fifteen-
day grace period provided by Rule 26.3. However, appellant must provide a reasonable
2 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.). Appellant’s notice
of appeal provides no explanation for the late filing. In addition, appellant did not file a
motion for extension of time to file her notice of appeal providing a reasonable explanation
for the late filing, and the time to do so has expired. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3.
Rule 42.3 permits an appellate court, on its own initiative after giving ten days’
notice to all parties, to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction or for failure to comply
with a requirement of the appellate rules. See id. R. 42.3(a), (c). Rule 2 authorizes an
appellate court to suspend a rule’s operation in a particular case to expedite a decision.
See id. R. 2. Because appellant’s notice of appeal was untimely, we lack jurisdiction and
are not authorized to extend the time for perfecting an appeal except as provided by
Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and 26.3. See id. R. 26. We suspend Rule
42.3’s requirement of ten days’ notice to all parties and dismiss the appeal for want of
jurisdiction on our own motion. See id. R. 2, 42.3(a), (c).
CLARISSA SILVA Justice
Delivered and filed on the 31st day of October, 2025.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In the Interest of M.C.J. and E.J.J., Children v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-mcj-and-ejj-children-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.