Cynthia Selph, Anthony Selph, Walton Selph and Al Selph v. SSC Houston Woodwind Operating Company, L.P.--Appeal from 80th District Court of Harris County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 20, 2010. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals ___________________ NO. 14-10-00213-CV ___________________ CYNTHIA SELPH, ANTHONY SELPH, WALTON SELPH, AND AL SELPH, Appellants V. SSC HOUSTON WOODWIND OPERATING COMPANY, L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 80th District court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2007-76335 MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an attempted appeal from a judgment signed October 2, 2009. A motion for new trial was filed on October 19, 2009. Appellants notice of appeal was filed March 3, 2010. When an appellant has filed a timely motion for new trial, the notice of appeal must be filed within ninety days after the date the judgment is signed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a). Appellants notice of appeal was not filed timely. 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, 617-18 (1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). Appellants notice of appeal was not filed within the fifteen-day period provided by rule 26.3. On April 8, 2010, notification was transmitted to all parties of the court=s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Appellant filed no response. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Brown, Sullivan, and Christopher. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
