From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ford v. Hulipas

State of Texas in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals
Dec 9, 2014
NO. 14-14-00728-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 9, 2014)

Opinion

NO. 14-14-00728-CV

12-09-2014

ALI KAFI FORD, Appellant v. EDGAR A. HULIPAS, ET AL, Appellee


On Appeal from the 412th District Court Brazoria County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 78218I

ORDER

This court issued its opinion and judgment in this case on November 13, 2014. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 49.1 provides for the filing of a motion for rehearing within fifteen days after a court of appeals' judgment or order is rendered. Tex. R. App. Proc. 49.1. Appellant filed a motion for rehearing on December 4, 2014, more than 15 days after this court's judgment was rendered.

According to appellant's motion, it was placed in the prison mail on December 4, 2014.

"A court of appeals may extend the time for filing a motion for rehearing or en banc reconsideration if a party files a motion complying with Rule 10.5(b) no later than 15 days after the last date for filing the motion." Tex. R. App. P. 49.8. A party seeking an extension of time in the court of appeals is required to file a motion specifically stating the facts that reasonably explain the need for an extension. Rios v. Calhoon, 889 S.W.2d 257, 259 (Tex. 1994); see also Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b)(1)(C) (requiring motion to extend time to include facts relied on to reasonably explain the need for an extension). No motion for extension of time was filed in this case, however.

The Texas Supreme Court has consistently treated minor procedural mistakes with leniency to preserve appellate rights. See,; Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 616-17 (Tex. 1997) (implying extension of time when a party perfects an appeal in good faith within the 15-day period for filing an extension). Thus, a motion for extension of time can be implied when a motion for rehearing is filed within the 15-day period for filing a motion for extension of time if the appellant thereafter files a motion complying with Rule 10.5(b)(1) that contains a reasonable explanation to support the late filing. See Houser v. McElveen, 243 S.W.3d 646, 647 (Tex. 2008); see also Miller v. Greenpark Surgery Ctr. Assoc., Ltd., 974 S.W.2d 805, 807 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.) (implying extension but requiring reasonable explanation).

Accordingly, unless appellant/appellee files with the clerk of this court a motion that complies with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.5(b)(1) and provides a reasonable explanation for the late filing of the party's motion for rehearing within 10 days of the date of this order, the court will deny the motion for rehearing as untimely.

PER CURIAM


Summaries of

Ford v. Hulipas

State of Texas in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals
Dec 9, 2014
NO. 14-14-00728-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 9, 2014)
Case details for

Ford v. Hulipas

Case Details

Full title:ALI KAFI FORD, Appellant v. EDGAR A. HULIPAS, ET AL, Appellee

Court:State of Texas in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals

Date published: Dec 9, 2014

Citations

NO. 14-14-00728-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 9, 2014)