Edward M. Edson v. The State of TexasAppeal from 345th District Court of Travis County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-14-00213-CV Edward M. Edson, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 345TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-GV-12-000116, HONORABLE GISELA D. TRIANA, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION The State of Texas filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction arguing that the notice of appeal filed by Edward M. Edson is untimely. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. For the reasons that follow, we will grant the motion. After the time for filing a notice of appeal and seeking an extension of time to file the notice of appeal have expired, a party cannot invoke an appellate court s jurisdiction. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997); see also Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(b) (filing of notice of appeal invokes appellate court s jurisdiction over parties). Here, Edson filed a notice of appeal on April 7, 2014, challenging a November 5, 2013 judgment in the underlying suit. Before filing his notice of appeal, Edson filed a timely motion for new trial. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b(a) (motion for new trial is timely if filed within thirty days after judgment is signed). The timely filing of a motion for new trial extends the appellate timetable by ninety days. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a) (certain postjudgment motions extend time for filing notice of appeal). As such, Edson s timely motion for new trial extended the deadline for filing his notice of appeal by ninety days from the date that the judgment was signed to February 3, 2014. See id. Edson might have obtained an extension of time for filing his notice of appeal until February 18, 2014, but that time has also expired. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3 (notice-of-appeal deadline may be extended if, within fifteen days after deadline, appellant files notice of appeal in trial court and files proper motion for extension of time in appellate court). Edson did not file his notice of appeal until April 7, 2014. On May 14, 2014, we requested that Edson file a response to the State s motion to dismiss. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Edson filed a response acknowledging that the time for filing his notice of appeal and for seeking an extension of time to file his notice of appeal have expired. Nevertheless, on May 28, 2014, Edson filed a motion for extension of time to file his notice of appeal. We lack jurisdiction to grant that untimely motion. See Tex. R. App. P. 2 (prohibiting appellate courts from construing rule to alter time for perfecting appeal in civil case), 25.1(b), 26.3; Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617. Because Edson s April 7, 2014 notice of appeal from the November 5, 2013 judgment is untimely, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(b), 26.1; Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617. We grant the State s motion and dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Jeff Rose, Justice Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Rose Dismissed on Appellee s Motion Filed: June 5, 2014 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.
