Roberto Villarreal, Ramona Villarreal, Viola Villarreal Garcia, Gloria Villarreal Salinas and Fernando Villarreal v. Chesapeake Zapata, L.P., Chesapeake Operating, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Roberto Villarreal, Ramona Villarreal, Viola Villarreal Garcia, Gloria Villarreal Salinas and Fernando Villarreal v. Chesapeake Zapata, L.P., Chesapeake Operating, Inc.

DecidedFebruary 13, 2019

Docket04-19-00071-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Roberto Villarreal, Ramona Villarreal, Viola Villarreal Garcia, Gloria Villarreal Salinas and Fernando Villarreal v. Chesapeake Zapata, L.P., Chesapeake Operating, Inc. (Roberto Villarreal, Ramona Villarreal, Viola Villarreal Garcia, Gloria Villarreal Salinas and Fernando Villarreal v. Chesapeake Zapata, L.P., Chesapeake Operating, Inc.) 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

Roberto Villarreal, Ramona Villarreal, Viola Villarreal Garcia, Gloria Villarreal Salinas and Fernando Villarreal v. Chesapeake Zapata, L.P., Chesapeake Operating, Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas February 13, 2019

No. 04-19-00071-CV

Roberto VILLARREAL, Ramona Villarreal, Viola Villarreal Garcia, Gloria Villarreal Salinas and Fernando Villarreal, Appellants

v.

CHESAPEAKE ZAPATA, L.P., Chesapeake Operating, Inc., Appellees

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Zapata County, Texas Trial Court No. 8848 Honorable Jose A. Lopez, Judge Presiding

ORDER The trial court signed a final order on October 11, 2018. Appellants timely filed a motion for new trial on November 12, 2018. Therefore, appellants’ notice of appeal was due to be filed no later than January 9, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due on January 24, 2019, fifteen days after the deadline for filing notice of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. It appears, however, that appellants did not file a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal until February 6, 2019, after the expiration of the fifteen-day grace period allowed by Rule 26.3. Id.

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 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). But, “once the period for granting a motion for extension of time under Rule [26.3] has passed, a party can no longer invoke the appellate court’s jurisdiction.” Id.

It is therefore ORDERED that appellants show cause in writing March 15, 2019 why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. All appellate deadlines are suspended pending our determination of whether we have jurisdiction of this appeal.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 13th day of February, 2019.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE, Clerk of Court

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

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas February 13, 2019

No. 04-19-00071-CV

Roberto VILLARREAL, Ramona Villarreal, Viola Villarreal Garcia, Gloria Villarreal Salinas and Fernando Villarreal, Appellants

v.

CHESAPEAKE ZAPATA, L.P., Chesapeake Operating, Inc., Appellees

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Zapata County, Texas Trial Court No. 8848 Honorable Jose A. Lopez, Judge Presiding

ORDER The trial court signed a final order on October 11, 2018. Appellants timely filed a motion for new trial on November 12, 2018. Therefore, appellants’ notice of appeal was due to be filed no later than January 9, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due on January 24, 2019, fifteen days after the deadline for filing notice of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. It appears, however, that appellants did not file a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal until February 6, 2019, after the expiration of the fifteen-day grace period allowed by Rule 26.3. Id.

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 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). But, “once the period for granting a motion for extension of time under Rule [26.3] has passed, a party can no longer invoke the appellate court’s jurisdiction.” Id.

It is therefore ORDERED that appellants show cause in writing March 15, 2019 why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. All appellate deadlines are suspended pending our determination of whether we have jurisdiction of this appeal.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 13th day of February, 2019.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE, Clerk of Court

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Roberto Villarreal, Ramona Villarreal, Viola Villarreal Garcia, Gloria Villarreal Salinas and Fernando Villarreal v. Chesapeake Zapata, L.P., Chesapeake Operating, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberto-villarreal-ramona-villarreal-viola-villarreal-garcia-gloria-texapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack