In the Interest of J.D.B., K.M.R.B. and D.L.R.B., Children--Appeal from 198th Judicial District Court of Kimble County

Annotate this Case
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-03-00068-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF J.D.B., K.M.R.B., and D.L.R.B., Children
From the 198th Judicial District Court, Kimble County, Texas
Trial Court No. 01-2560
Honorable Emil Karl Prohl, Judge Presiding (1)

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Paul W. Green, Justice

Delivered and Filed: April 2, 2003

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

The trial court signed a final order of termination on October 25, 2002. Although a timely motion for new trial was filed, section 263.405 of the Texas Family Code provides that a motion for a new trial or any other post-trial motion in the trial court does not extend the deadline for filing a notice of appeal under Rule 26.1(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 263.405 (Vernon 2002). Rule 26.1(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure requires a notice of appeal to be filed within twenty days after the order is signed. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(b). Accordingly, a notice of appeal would only be timely in this appeal if the notice was filed by November 14, 2002. Alternatively, appellants could have invoked this court's jurisdiction by filing a notice of appeal in the trial court and a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal in this court no later than November 29, 2002. Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. The notices of appeal were filed in this appeal on January 24, 2003, and January 27, 2003, respectively.

On March 6, 2003, we ordered appellants to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. One of the appellants' attorneys responded that he was not appointed to represent appellant until the day after the notice of appeal was due, and he did not receive notice of the appointment until sometime after November 18, 2003. Although we understand the dilemma faced by appellant's attorney, "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." Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

PER CURIAM

PUBLISH

1. The Honorable Emil Karl Prohl adopted the orders recommended by the Honorable Associate Judge Rob Hoffman.

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.