Veronica Chavez v. Mark Vara

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 16, 2023
• Docket: 08-23-00265-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

VERONICA CHAVEZ, § No. 08-23-00265-CV

Appellant, § Appeal from the

v. § 388th Judicial District Court

MARK VARA, § of El Paso County, Texas

Appellee. § (TC# 2012DCM10912)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is before the Court on its own motion to determine whether the appeal should

be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Concluding that Appellant’s notice of appeal is untimely, we

dismiss the appeal.

Appellant Chavez attempts to appeal a prefiling order entered on June 22, 2023, declaring

her a vexatious litigant and prohibiting her from filing, pro se, any new litigation without the local

administrative judge’s permission. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 11.101. A prefiling

order entered under § 11.101 is an appealable interlocutory order. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.

CODE ANN. § 11.101(c); Restrepo v. All. Riggers & Constructors, Ltd., No. 08-15-00011-CV, 2015

WL 999950, at *1 (Tex. App.—El Paso Mar. 4, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for

publication) (“A pre-filing order is appealable.”). Interlocutory appeals are accelerated, and a party perfects such an appeal by timely filing a notice of appeal within 20 days after a final judgment is

signed. TEX. R. APP. P. 28.1(a) (providing for accelerated interlocutory appeals); 26.1(b)

(providing a 20-day deadline for filing a notice of appeal in an accelerated appeal).

On October 5, 2023, Appellant filed her notice of appeal of the prefiling order entered on

June 22, 2023. The same day, the Clerk of this Court sent Appellant a letter indicating that the

appeal was not timely perfected. The letter gave notice of the Court’s intent to dismiss the appeal

for want of jurisdiction after ten days from the date of the letter unless grounds were shown for the

Court to continue the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Appellant timely filed a response to this

Court’s letter in which she acknowledges she filed the appeal past the 20-day deadline. Although

Appellant’s notice of appeal is untimely, she asks this Court to grant her an extension of time.

In support of her request, Appellant cites our recent opinion In re Vara, a case in which

Appellant petitioned this Court for mandamus relief from the same prefiling order that she also

challenged by direct appeal. In re Vara, No. 08-23-00190-CV, 2023 WL 4771218, at *1

(Tex. App.—El Paso 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication). We

denied the petition, finding that Appellant was not entitled to mandamus relief because she had an

adequate remedy by direct appeal. Id. Appellant contends that we should construe our opinion as

granting an implied extension to file her notice of appeal in this cause. We decline to do so.

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 26.3 provides that an appellate court “may extend

the time to file a notice of appeal if, within 15 days after the deadline for filing the notice of

appeal,” Appellant files a notice of appeal in both the trial and appellate courts. TEX. R. APP. P.

26.3. Appellant’s notice of appeal was not filed in this Court until October 5, 2023, well outside

of the 20-day deadline and 15-day grace period contemplated by the Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b), 26.3.

2 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 42.3(a),

(c), 43.2(f).

LISA J. SOTO, Justice

October 16, 2023

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Soto, JJ.