Opinion
No. 01-02-00912-CV
Opinion issued May 15, 2003.
On Appeal from the 113th District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 98-25891.
Panel consists of Chief Justice RADDACK and Justices ALCALA and HIGLEY.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal of the granting of appellee's (the City's) motion for summary judgment on appellant's suit against the City for the conversion of appellant's camera and associated equipment valued at $1,000.
The trial court signed the order granting the City's motion for summary judgment on September 12, 2000. According to a memorandum appellant has filed with this Court, the trial court clerk did not give him notice of the signing of the order, and he did not learn of it until August 2, 2002. On August 26, 2002, appellant filed a "Plaintiff's Pro Se Notice of Appeal Out of Time" and a "Plaintiff's Pro Se Motion for Out of Time Appeal.
On January 30, 2003, this Court issued an order noting its apparent lack of jurisdiction to consider the appeal, citing Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 306(a)(4) and Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1. We advised appellant that his appeal would be dismissed unless by March 3, 2003, he demonstrated to this Court that it has jurisdiction. In response, appellant has filed a memorandum addressing the question of this Court's jurisdiction. Appellant cites no legal authority demonstrating that this Court can consider the appeal of a judgment in which the notice of appeal is filed almost two years after the judgment's signing.
Accordingly, we dismiss appellant's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.