Nail Road 1, LP v. Dallas County
This text of Nail Road 1, LP v. Dallas County (Nail Road 1, LP v. Dallas County) 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
DISMISS and Opinion Filed April 9, 2021
S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00537-CV
NAIL ROAD 1, L.P., Appellant V. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-17321
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Osborne, Pedersen, III, and Nowell Opinion by Justice Osborne This appeal challenges the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion to
reinstate the underlying suit, which appellant voluntarily nonsuited. Because the
notice of appeal was not timely filed, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
To ensure simplicity and certainty in determining the time for perfecting an
appeal, the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure calculate the deadline for filing a
notice of appeal from the date the final judgment is signed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1;
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 205 (Tex. 2001) (“Simplicity and certainty in appellate procedure are nowhere more important than in determining the
time for perfecting appeal.”). When a post-judgment motion such as a motion to
reinstate or motion for new trial is filed, the deadline is ninety days, or with an
extension motion 105 days, from the date the judgment is signed. See id. 26.1(a),
26.3. An order denying a post-judgment motion such as a motion to reinstate or
motion for new trial is not separately appealable from the final judgment and does
not start the appellate timetable. See Jarrell v. Bergdorf, 580 S.W.3d 463, 465 (Tex.
App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, no pet.).
The notice of appeal here was filed within thirty days of the order denying the
motion to reinstate but 124 days after the order of nonsuit. Because the notice of
appeal appeared untimely, we questioned our jurisdiction over the appeal and
directed the parties to file letter briefs addressing our concern. See Brashear v.
Victoria Gardens of McKinney, L.L.C., 302 S.W.3d 542, 545 (Tex. App.—Dallas
2009, no pet.) (timely filing of notice of appeal is jurisdictional).
Appellant argues in its jurisdictional brief that because the underlying suit was
voluntarily nonsuited, the operative order is the order denying reinstatement and the
deadline for filing the notice of appeal was the date the trial court’s plenary
jurisdiction over the case expired–-thirty days after the order denying reinstatement
was signed. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 329b(e) (trial court retains plenary power over case
for thirty days after all post-judgment motions are overruled by operation of law or
written order, whichever occurs first). Appellant appears to reason that the order
–2– denying reinstatement should trigger the appellate deadlines because that is the basis
for the appeal, not the voluntary nonsuit.
Having an appellate deadline unique to appeals that follow voluntary nonsuits
affords no certainty or simplicity. As noted above and argued by appellee in its
responsive letter brief, the appellate rules expressly provide the deadline runs from
the signing of the judgment, not the order denying the post-judgment motion. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1; Jarrell, 580 S.W.3d at 465.
As the notice of appeal here was not filed within 105 days of the signing of
the judgment–-the order of nonsuit, it was not timely, and we lack jurisdiction over
the appeal. See Brashear, 302 S.W.3d at 545. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.
/Leslie Osborne/ LESLIE OSBORNE JUSTICE 200537F.P05
–3– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
NAIL ROAD 1, L.P., Appellant On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-20-00537-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-17321. Opinion delivered by Justice DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, Osborne, Justices Pedersen, III and Appellee Nowell participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.
We ORDER that appellee Dallas County, Texas recover its costs, if any, of this appeal from appellant Nail Road 1, L.P.
Judgment entered April 9, 2021.
–4–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Nail Road 1, LP v. Dallas County, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nail-road-1-lp-v-dallas-county-texapp-2021.