Paul E. NuNu v. Nancy NuNu Risk and Charles L.NuNu

Opinion

Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 20, 2019.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-19-00084-CV

PAUL E. NUNU, Appellant

V.

NANCY NUNU RISK AND CHARLES L.NUNU, Appellees

On Appeal from the Probate Court No 2 Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 416781

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an attempted appeal from a final order awarding attorneys’ fees and costs in a probate matter signed October 19, 2018. Appellant has been declared a vexatious litigant, a declaration this court has affirmed. Nunu v. Risk, 567 S.W.3d 462, 469 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, pet. filed).

Appellant filed a motion for new trial with respect to the October 19 order on November 16, 2018. Appellant was required to obtain permission to appeal the order, but the administrative judge denied permission. Notwithstanding the denial of permission, appellant filed a notice of appeal on January 31, 2019. After conducting a hearing, the trial court struck appellant’s notice of appeal. After the trial court struck appellant’s first notice of appeal, appellant filed an amended notice of appeal outside of the 90-day time period for filing a notice of appeal and beyond the additional 15-day grace period for filing a motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a); Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617–18 (1997). Because the trial court struck appellant’s first notice of appeal, and because appellant’s amended notice of appeal is untimely, neither notice of appeal invoked this court’s jurisdiction. See Aziz v. Waris, No. 01-15- 00175-CV, 2015 WL 5076295 at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 27, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.) (holding that where trial court struck motion for new trial, appellate timetable by not extended by motion for new trial).

We lack jurisdiction and dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Hassan.