Mr. Melvin Glenn v. Texas Department of Human Services and Protective and Regulatory Services--Appeal from 19th District Court of McLennan County

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-97-042-CV

MR. MELVIN GLENN,

Appellant

v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN

SERVICES AND PROTECTIVE AND

REGULATORY SERVICES,

Appellee

From the 19th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court # 94-1227-1,3

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Melvin Glenn, proceeding pro se, is attempting to appeal the dismissal of his petition to obtain managing conservatorship of three children of whom he claims to be a grandfather. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 102.004 (Vernon 1996). A transcript in the cause was tendered to this court on February 5, 1997. Upon examining it, we drew a tentative conclusion that Glenn had not properly perfected his appeal. Accordingly, on February 6, 1997, we ordered Glenn to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. We have received no response from Glenn concerning the perfection of his appeal; however, on February 20, 1997, he filed a motion to extend the time to file the transcript. We deny Glenn's motion to file the transcript late and, accordingly, dismiss the appeal.

According to the transcript tendered to us, the judgment was signed on November 18, 1996. No post-trial motion was filed that extended the appellate timetable. Under Rule of Appellate Procedure 54(a), Glenn was permitted sixty days from the date of judgment, until January 17, 1997, to timely file the record. Tex. R. App. P. 54(a). Glenn did not tender a transcript to this court until February 5, 1997.

On February 20, 1997, Glenn filed a motion to extend the time to file the transcript. Rule 54(c), however, allows appellants only an additional fifteen days from the date the record is due to file a motion for an extension, and appellate courts have no authority to grant an untimely request to extend the time to file the transcript. Id. 54(c); see B.D. Click Co. v. Safari Drilling Corp., 638 S.W.2d 860, 862 (Tex. 1982); Jarrell v. Serfass, 916 S.W.2d 719, 720 (Tex. App. Waco 1996, no writ). Glenn's motion for extension was due to be filed by February 3, 1997. See Tex. R. App. P. 54(a); see also id. 5(a). // The motion he filed on February 20, 1997, was filed seventeen days late; therefore, we must deny his motion for extension.

This court has no authority to consider an untimely transcript. Tex. R. App. P. 54(a); see Jarrell, 916 S.W.2d at 720-21; Knight v. Sam Houston Memorial Hosp., 907 S.W.2d 847, 848 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, writ denied). Without a transcript, "we have no knowledge of the contents of the petition, the jury charge, any pre-trial, trial or post-trial motions, or the judgment." Jarrell, 916 S.W.2d at 721. The transcript Glenn tendered to this court was untimely. Because we cannot consider it to determine the merits of his appeal, we will dismiss. See Office of Pub. Util. Counsel v. Public Util. Comm'n of Texas, 878 S.W.2d 598, 598-99 (Tex. 1994); Jarrell, 916 S.W.2d at 721.

The motion to extend the time to file the record is denied, and the appeal is dismissed for failure to timely file a record.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis,

Justice Cummings, and

Justice Vance

Motion to extend time to file a record denied

Dismissed for failure to timely file a record

Opinion delivered and filed April 2, 1997

Do not publish