Christopher Demouchette v. Bob Johnson and Probation Service Inc., et al.--Appeal from 298th District Court of Dallas County

Annotate this Case

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

 
CHRISTOPHER DEMOUCHETTE,

Appellant,

 

v.

 

BOB JOHNSON, SENIOR PARTNER, PAROLE AND PROBATION SERVICES INC.,

 

Appellees.

 

 
No. 08-08-00037-CV

Appeal from the

 

298th Judicial District Court

 

of Dallas County, Texas

 

(TC# 06-02708-M)

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

This appeal is before the Court on its own motion for determination whether it should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App.P. 42.3. The trial court dismissed the case underlying this appeal for want of prosecution on November 28, 2006. Although Appellant filed a motion to reinstate on January 8, 2007, the motion was untimely. See Tex.R.Civ.P. 165a(3)(a motion to reinstate is due within thirty days of the date the order of dismissal is signed). Consequently, Appellant's notice of appeal was due December 28, 2006, thirty days after dismissal order was signed. See Tex.R.App.P. 26.1. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on December 10, 2007.

This Court possesses the authority to dismiss an appeal for want of jurisdiction after giving proper notice to all parties. See Tex.R.App.P. 42.3. On January 14, 2008, the clerk of the Court notified Appellant that this Court may not have jurisdiction over this appeal because it appeared the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Appellant was advised that this appeal would be dismissed unless any party could show cause for continuing the appeal within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court's notice. Appellant has not responded.

Because the notice of appeal was filed more than thirty days after judgment it is untimely and failed to perfect the appeal. See Tex.R.App.P. 26.1, 25.1(b). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App.P. 42.3(a).

 

February 28, 2008

DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Chief Justice

 

Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Carr, JJ.

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.