In the Interest of Amanda Nicole Apac and Arturo Apac, Jr., Minor Children--Appeal from County Court at Law of Webb County

Per Curiam

Sitting: Tom Rickhoff, Justice

Alma L. L pez, Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 20, 2000

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

The trial court signed a judgment on February 29, 2000. Appellants filed a timely motion for new trial on March 30, 2000. Therefore, the notice of appeal was due to be filed on May 29, 2000. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a). Appellants filed a notice of appeal on June 23, 2000. A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due on June 13, 2000. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. No motion for extension of time was filed. It thus appeared that the notice of appeal was not filed within the time allowed for filing a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal. Therefore, on August 7, 2000, we ordered appellants to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

On August 21, 2000, appellants filed a motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal, stating that the notice of appeal was not timely filed because the due date was incorrectly calendered by counsel.

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). But "once the period for granting a motion for extension of time under Rule [26.3] has passed, a party can no longer invoke the appellate court's jurisdiction." Id. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH