Catalina Salazar v. Rosario Garza and Connie Garza Appeal from County Court of Guadalupe County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-21-00166-CV Catalina SALAZAR, Appellant v. Rosario GARZA and Connie Garza, Appellees From the County Court, Guadalupe County, Texas Trial Court No. 2020-CV-0067 Honorable Bill Squires, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Irene Rios, Justice Beth Watkins, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Delivered and Filed: August 25, 2021 DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION A timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke this court’s jurisdiction. See Sweed v. Nye, 323 S.W.3d 873, 875 (Tex. 2010); North Cent. Baptist Hosp. v. Chavez, No. 04-20-00590-CV, 2021 WL 983351, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Mar. 17, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op.). In this case, the trial court signed a final judgment on March 9, 2021. Because appellant did not file a motion for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion for reinstatement, or request for findings of fact and conclusions of law, appellant’s notice of appeal was due on April 8, 2021. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). A motion for extension of time to file appellant’s notice of appeal was due on 04-21-00166-CV April 23, 2021. See id. 26.3. Appellant did not file her notice of appeal until April 19, 2021, and she did not file a motion for extension of time pursuant to Rule 26.3. See id. 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, 616 (Tex. 1997). However, an appellant must provide a reasonable explanation for failing to file her notice of appeal in a timely manner. See id.; TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. On July 2, 2021, we ordered appellant to file, on or before July 19, 2021, a response presenting a reasonable explanation for failing to file her notice of appeal in a timely manner. We warned that if appellant failed to file a satisfactory response within the time provided, this appeal would be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant did not respond. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM -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.
