Opinion
Case No. 20080718-CA.
Filed April 9, 2009. Not For Official Publication
Appeal from the Second District, Ogden Department, 030902215 The Honorable Scott M. Hadley.
Glenn Harper, Huntsville, Appellant.
Pro Se Zane S. Froerer, Ogden, for Appellees.
Before Judges Greenwood, Orme, and Davis.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Glenn Harper appeals the district court's judgment entered on July 15, 2008. This matter is before the court on a motion for summary disposition on the ground that the notice of appeal was not timely filed. We dismiss the appeal.
Harper filed his notice of appeal on August 15, 2008. Pursuant to rule 4(a) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure, a notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days of the entry of the final order or judgment appealed. See Utah R. App. P. 4(a). If a notice of appeal is not timely filed, this court lacks jurisdiction to consider the appeal. See Serrato v. Utah Transit Auth., 2000 UT App 299, ¶ 7, 13 P.3d 616. If the court lacks jurisdiction over an appeal, it has only the authority to dismiss the appeal. See Varian-Eimac, Inc. v. Lamoreaux, 767 P.2d 569, 570 (Utah Ct. App. 1989).
In order to extend the time to file a notice of appeal, a post-judgment motion must be filed pursuant to rule 50(b), 52(b), or 59 of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure. See Utah R. App. P. 4(b). Only motions filed pursuant to the rules expressly recognized by rule 4(b) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure extend the time for appeal.See Gillett v. Price, 2006 UT 24,
¶ 7, 135 P.3d 861. Otherwise, in order to extend the time for appeal, a motion must be filed pursuant to rule 4(e) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Utah R. App. P. 4(e).
Harper's notice of appeal was filed more than thirty days after the entry of the final order. Although the parties filed post-judgment documents, none of the filings are recognized under rule 4(b) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure. As such, the documents did not extend the time for filing the notice of appeal. See id. R. 4(b). Furthermore, the record indicates that Harper did not file a motion to extend the time to appeal pursuant to rule 4(e). Thus, Harper's appeal is untimely, and this court is required to dismiss it. See Varian-Eimac, Inc., 767 P.2d at 570.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Pamela T. Greenwood, Presiding Judge, Gregory K. Orme, Judge, James Z. Davis, Judge.