Opinion
04-23-00102-CV
05-10-2023
IN THE INTEREST OF Z.M.W.
From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2022-PA-00462 Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding
Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
ORDER
PER CURIAM
On January 30, 2023, appellant filed a premature notice of appeal in this cause. Because a final order of termination had not been signed by the trial court, on February 22, 2023, we ordered appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. When a supplemental clerk's record containing a final order was not filed, on April 26, 2023, we dismissed this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
On May 3, 2023, appellant filed a motion to reinstate this appeal. In her motion to reinstate, appellant's appointed appellate counsel explains that the trial court signed a final order of termination on March 29, 2023, but appointed appellate counsel was not sent a copy of the final order and thus had no notice a final order had been signed.
In addition to the motion to reinstate, appellant filed a new notice of appeal on May 3, 2023, stating her intent to appeal from the trial court's final order of termination signed on March 29, 2023. Because an appeal from an order terminating parental rights is accelerated, appellant's notice of appeal was due April 18, 2023. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b). A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due on May 3, 2023. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. Although appellant filed a notice of appeal within the fifteen-day grace period allowed by Rule 26.3, she did not file a motion for extension of time.
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). However, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. See id.; TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C). In her motion to reinstate, appellant has provided a reasonable explanation-her appointed appellate counsel was not given notice that the final order had been signed. See Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617. Therefore, her implied motion for extension of time to file her notice of appeal is granted, and her notice of appeal is deemed timely filed.
We DENY appellant's motion to reinstate this appeal. However, as her new notice of appeal is timely filed, we DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to file her new notice of appeal in a new appellate cause number. We further DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to file a copy of the clerk's record in this cause, Appeal No. 04-23-00102-CV, into the new appellate cause number.
It is so ORDERED.