Opinion
No. 05-05-01306-CV
Opinion Filed January 3, 2006.
On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 03-31732-T-L.
Dismissed.
Before Justices MOSELEY, BRIDGES, and O'NEILL.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
By letter dated November 15, 2005, the Court notified appellant that it appeared her notice of appeal was untimely. The final judgment in this case was signed on December 15, 2004 and no appeal was taken from this judgment. On August 5, 2005, after the trial court's plenary jurisdiction had expired, appellee filed a motion for judgment nunc pro tunc asking the trial court to change the spelling of a street name. The trial court granted appellee's motion and, on August 15, 2005, it signed a final judgment nunc pro tunc changing the spelling of the street name from "Majorie" to "Marjorie." Appellant did file a notice of appeal from this judgment.
A judgment nunc pro tunc does not restart the time to file an appeal with respect to any complaint that could have been presented in an appeal from the original judgment. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 306a(6). Moreover, a nunc pro tunc judgment entered after a trial court's plenary jurisdiction has expired does not extend the time for perfecting an appeal. Cavalier Corp. v. Store Enterprises, Inc., 742 S.W.2d 785, 787 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1987, writ denied). It appears that there is not complaint appellant could raise following the judgment nunc pro tunc correcting the spelling of the street name that she could not have presented in an appeal from the original judgment. See Quick Line Corp. v. Ward Jackson, Inc., 759 S.W.2d 192, 194-95 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1988, no writ) (concluding that because the trial court no longer possessed plenary power to make substantive changes in the judgment, no new matter from which to appeal could possibly be contained in the new judgment).
In light of these circumstances, the Court instructed appellant to file a jurisdictional brief by November 28, 2005, explaining how this Court has jurisdiction over this appeal and warned appellant that failure to comply could result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. As of the date of this opinion, no jurisdictional brief has been filed. Accordingly, we DISMISS the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App.P. 42.3(a), (c).