Opinion
No. 05-05-00153-CV
Opinion Filed April 18, 2005.
On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 03-05525.
Dismiss.
Before Justices BRIDGES, O'NEILL and MAZZANT.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this case, the final judgment was signed on August 23, 2004 and appellant filed her notice of appeal on January 31, 2005, one hundred and sixty-one days after the judgment was signed. Appellant filed a timely motion for new trial, which was denied on December 1, 2004. The timely filed motion for new trial extended the time to file notice of appeal until November 21, 2004. See Tex.R.App.P. 26.1. With the 15 day extension allowed by rule 26.3, a notice of appeal may be timely filed as late as 105 days after the judgment was signed, or, in this case, on December 6, 2004. See Tex.R.App.P. 26.3. However, the notice of appeal, filed 161 days after judgment was signed, was not timely filed. See Tex.R.App.P. 26.1. By the Court's letter dated March 17, 2005, appellant was instructed to file, within ten days, a jurisdictional letter brief addressing the Court's concern regarding the untimeliness of this appeal and the Court's jurisdiction. Based on her response, appellant apparently believes that she had 90 days from the date the motion for new trial was denied to file her notice of appeal. However, the calculation of the 90 day extension allowed upon the timely filing of a motion for new trial commences with the date the judgment is signed, and not from the date the motion for new trial is denied. See Tex.R.App.P. 26.1(a); Naaman v. Grider, 126 S.W.3rd 73, 74 (Tex. 2003) (per curiam) (noting that the trial court's denial of the motion for new trial did not modify the judgment and restart the appellate time table). Accordingly, the notice of appeal was untimely filed, and this Court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal.
On the Court's own motion, we DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App.P. 42.3(a).