Joyce M. Spivey and Eddie W. Spivey v. State of Texas, by and through Texas Tech University--Appeal from 72nd District Court of Lubbock County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 07-02-0113-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL A MAY 6, 2002 ______________________________ JOYCE M. SPIVEY AND EDDIE W. SPIVEY, APPELLANTS V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, BY AND THROUGH TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY, APPELLEE _________________________________ FROM THE 72ND DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY; NO. 99-507501; HONORABLE J. BLAIR CHERRY, JR., JUDGE _______________________________ Before BOYD, C.J., and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ. Appealing from a summary judgment granted in favor of appellee on December 4, 2001, Joyce M. Spivey and Eddie W. Spivey filed their notice of appeal on March 5, 2002. The Spiveys filed a motion for new trial making their notice of appeal due no later than March 4, 2002. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a)(1). The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure allow this Court to extend the time to file a notice of appeal for 15 days following the deadline, if the party filed the notice within the 15-day window and files a motion for extension that reasonably explains the need for the extension. Tex. R. App. P. 26.3; Jones v. City of Houston, 976 S.W.2d 676, 677 (Tex. 1998); Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when a notice of appeal is filed in good faith within the 15-day window following the deadline. Jones, 976 S.W.2d at 677; Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617. However, it is still necessary for an appellant to reasonably explain the need for an extension. Jones, 976 S.W.2d at 677; Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617. By letter dated April 22, 2002, this Court notified the Spiveys counsel, Mr. David Martinez, of the untimely notice of appeal requesting that he show grounds for continuing the appeal within ten days. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. Counsel failed to respond to this Court s notice. See Chilkewitz v. Scott Winter, M.D., et al., 25 S.W.3d 382, 383 (Tex.App. Fort Worth 2000, no pet.); Industrial Services U.S.A. v. American Bank, 17 S.W.3d 358, 359 (Tex.App. Corpus Christi 2000, no pet.); Kidd v. Paxton, S.W.3d 309, 310 (Tex.App. Amarillo 1999, pet. denied). Accordingly, the purported appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Don H. Reavis Justice 2 Do not publish. 3
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.
