Summary
dismissing Appellant's related appeal for same reason
Summary of this case from McElvain v. McElvainOpinion
NO. 02-16-00256-CV
08-26-2016
RUSSELL MCELVAIN APPELLANT v. ROBIN MCELVAIN APPELLEE
FROM THE 360TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
TRIAL COURT NO. 360-574786-15 MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pro se appellant Russell McElvain attempts a restricted appeal of the trial court's order of dismissal. A notice of a restricted appeal must be filed within six months after the judgment or order complained of is signed. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(c). McElvain's notice of restricted appeal was not filed until after the six-month deadline had passed.
On July 22, 2016, we notified McElvain that it appeared we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. We advised him that this appeal could be dismissed unless he, or any party desiring to continue the appeal, filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal on or before August 1, 2016. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). On July 29, 2016, McElvain filed an untimely "Motion to Extend Appellate Deadline." See Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b), 26.3. We construe McElvain's "Motion to Extend Appellate Deadline" as both a motion and a response to our jurisdiction letter. When viewed in either light, McElvain's motion does not show grounds for continuing the appeal.
The time for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional in this court, and absent a timely-filed notice of appeal or extension request, we must dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 2, 25.1(b), 26.3; Jones v. City of Houston, 976 S.W.2d 676, 677 (Tex. 1998); Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Because McElvain's notice of appeal was untimely, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); Jones, 976 S.W.2d at 677; Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617.
PER CURIAM PANEL: WALKER, GARDNER, and MEIER, JJ. DELIVERED: August 26, 2016
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.