In the Interest of T. G. H. and J. S. H., children Appeal from 117th District Court of Nueces County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-22-00286-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ IN THE INTEREST OF T. G. H. AND J. S. H., CHILDREN ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras This matter is before the Court on appellant’s motion for leave to file notice of appeal. We now dismiss the matter for want of jurisdiction. On May 20, 2022, the trial court signed a final order in suit affecting the parentchild relationship. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on June 23, 2022. On June 27, 2022, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that the appeal was not timely perfected. Appellant was advised that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court’s directive. On July 25, 2022, appellant filed a motion for leave to file notice of appeal. Appellant’s motion for leave to file a notice of appeal was not timely, as it was filed both later than the ten days required by the Clerk of the Court’s notice and more than fifteen days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. We are to construe the rules of appellate procedure reasonably and liberally so that the right to appeal is not lost by imposing requirements not absolutely necessary to effectuate the purpose of a rule. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 616-17 (Tex. 1997). Nevertheless, we are prohibited from enlarging the scope of our jurisdiction by altering the time for perfecting an appeal in a civil case in a manner not provided for by rule. See Tex. R. App. P. 2; In re T.W., 89 S.W.3d 641, 642 (Tex. App.–Amarillo 2002, no pet.). Appellant’s notice of appeal was untimely, and appellant’s motion for leave to file the notice of appeal was also untimely; therefore, we lack jurisdiction over the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss appellant’s motion and entire cause for want of jurisdiction. DORI CONTRERAS Chief Justice Delivered and filed on the 25th day of August, 2022. 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.
