Wayne Ernest Barker v. Theresa Chang

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 26, 2009
Docket14-09-00095-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Wayne Ernest Barker v. Theresa Chang (Wayne Ernest Barker v. Theresa Chang) 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
Wayne Ernest Barker v. Theresa Chang, (Tex. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 26, 2009

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 26, 2009.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-09-00095-CV

WAYNE ERNEST BARKER, Appellant

V.

THERESA CHANG, ET AL, Appellees

On Appeal from the 295th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2008-14490

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

This is an attempted appeal from a judgment signed April 14, 2008.  No motion for new trial was filed.  Appellant=s notice of appeal was filed January 12, 2009.

The notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed when appellant has not filed a timely motion for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion to reinstate, or request for findings of fact and conclusion of law.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1


Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed timely. 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, 617-18 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26).  However, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C); Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617-18.  Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed within the fifteen-day period provided by Rule 26.3.

On March 4, 2009, notification was transmitted to all parties of the Court=s intent to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).  Appellant=s response fails to demonstrate that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Brown, and Boyce.

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

Related

Verburgt v. Dorner
959 S.W.2d 615 (Texas Supreme Court, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Wayne Ernest Barker v. Theresa Chang, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wayne-ernest-barker-v-theresa-chang-texapp-2009.