Maria L. Reyna v. Juan A. Elizondo, Jr., and Connie L. Lockard

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 20, 2006
Docket14-05-00622-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Maria L. Reyna v. Juan A. Elizondo, Jr., and Connie L. Lockard (Maria L. Reyna v. Juan A. Elizondo, Jr., and Connie L. Lockard) 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
Maria L. Reyna v. Juan A. Elizondo, Jr., and Connie L. Lockard, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 20, 2006

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 20, 2006.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-05-00622-CV

MARIA L. REYNA, Appellant

V.

JUAN A. ELIZONDO, JR. AND CONNIE L. LOCKARD, Appellees

On Appeal from the 240th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 01-CV-121708

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N


Appellant Maria L. Reyna files this restricted appeal challenging the dismissal of her lawsuit for want of prosecution.  The trial court dismissed Reyna=s lawsuit on December 16, 2004.  She filed a motion to reinstate on January 14, 2005.  The motion was overruled by operation of law, and Reyna filed her notice of restricted appeal on June 14, 2005.  Restricted appeals are not available to a party who timely files a postjudgment motion.  See Tex. R. App. P. 30.  Reyna filed her motion to reinstate within thirty days of the dismissal order and thus timely filed a postjudgment motion.  See Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a(3).  Accordingly, Reyna is not entitled to a restricted appeal.  See Watts v. Goreen, No. 03-00-00673-CV, 2001 WL 578566, at *1 (Tex. App.CAustin May 31, 2001, no pet.) (not designated for publication) (dismissing restricted appeal based on appellant=s timely motion to reinstate); Thomas v. Tex. Dep=t of Crim. JusticeBInst. Div., 3 S.W.3d 665, 666B67  (Tex. App.CFort Worth 1999, no pet.) (finding restricted appeal not available to appellant who filed motion to reinstate).  Because Reyna did not meet the requirements for a restricted appeal and thus her notice of appeal was untimely, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a), 42.3(a); Starks v. Tex. Dep=t of Crim. Justice, 153 S.W.3d 621, 626 (Tex. App.CAmarillo 2004, no pet.).

/s/      Leslie Brock Yates

Justice

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed June 20, 2006.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Yates and Guzman.

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

Related

Starks v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice
153 S.W.3d 621 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Maria L. Reyna v. Juan A. Elizondo, Jr., and Connie L. Lockard, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maria-l-reyna-v-juan-a-elizondo-jr-and-connie-l-lo-texapp-2006.