Robert Salazar v. HP Texas I LLC Dba HP Texas LLC, HPA Texas SUB 2016-1 LLC, Ser Texas LLC and Pathlight Property Management Co.
This text of Robert Salazar v. HP Texas I LLC Dba HP Texas LLC, HPA Texas SUB 2016-1 LLC, Ser Texas LLC and Pathlight Property Management Co. (Robert Salazar v. HP Texas I LLC Dba HP Texas LLC, HPA Texas SUB 2016-1 LLC, Ser Texas LLC and Pathlight Property Management Co.) 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
Opinion issued October 17, 2023
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-23-00451-CV ——————————— ROBERT J. SALAZAR AND ELIA SALAZAR, Appellants V. HP TEXAS I LLC, HPA TEXAS SUB 2016-1 LLC, PATHLIGHT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, AND SER TEXAS LLC, Appellees
On Appeal from the 127th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 2019-17589
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On June 11, 2023, appellants, Robert J. Salazar and Elia Salazar, proceeding
pro se, filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s February 3, 2023 final judgment.
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Absent a timely filed notice of appeal, we lack jurisdiction over an appeal.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1. Generally, a notice of appeal from a final judgment must
be filed within thirty days after the entry of judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1.
Accordingly, in order to invoke this Court’s appellate jurisdiction over the trial
court’s February 3, 2023 judgment, appellants were required to file a notice of appeal
on or before March 6, 2023. Appellants’ June 11, 2023 notice of appeal was
therefore not timely filed.
However, where a party timely files certain post-judgment motions, the
deadline to file a notice of appeal is extended to ninety days after the entry of
judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(1). Post-judgment motions generally must
be filed within thirty days after the judgment or other order complained of is signed.
See TEX. R. CIV. P. 329b(a), (g).
The appellate record reflects that appellants timely filed a post-judgment
motion with the trial court. Accordingly, appellants’ notice of appeal was due no
later than May 4, 2023. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(1). Thus, appellants’ June 11,
2023 notice of appeal was still not timely filed to invoke the jurisdiction of this
Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(a)(1).
On September 19, 2023, the Clerk of this Court notified appellants that their
notice of appeal from the trial court’s February 3, 2023 judgment was not timely
filed. Appellants were directed to file a written response within ten days
2 demonstrating, with citation to law and the record, that the Court had jurisdiction
over the appeal. Despite notice that the appeal was subject to dismissal, appellants
did not adequately respond to the September 19, 2023 notice.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). All pending motions are dismissed as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Landau, and Farris.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Robert Salazar v. HP Texas I LLC Dba HP Texas LLC, HPA Texas SUB 2016-1 LLC, Ser Texas LLC and Pathlight Property Management Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-salazar-v-hp-texas-i-llc-dba-hp-texas-llc-hpa-texas-sub-2016-1-texapp-2023.