From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ramirez v. Coca-Cola Refreshments USA, Inc.

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON
Apr 17, 2013
Appellate case number: 01-13-00278-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 17, 2013)

Opinion

Appellate case number: 01-13-00278-CV Trial court case number: 1017216

04-17-2013

Gil Ramirez and Mariachi Bar & Grill LLC v. Coca-Cola Refreshments USA, Inc., f/k/a Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc.


ORDER

Trial court: County Civil Court at Law No. 4 of Harris County

Appellants appeal from the trial court's judgment signed on February 19, 2013. Their notice of appeal was due by March 21, 2013. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1. Appellants filed their notice of appeal 11 days later, on April 1, 2013.

We may extend the time to file the notice of appeal if, within 15 days after the deadline to file the notice of appeal, the appellant files a motion for extension. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b), 26.3. A motion for extension was due by April 5, 2013. Appellants electronically filed their motion for extension 3 days later, on April 8, 2013. As such, appellants' motion for extension of time did not extend the deadline to file their notice of appeal.

A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied, however, when, as here, appellants, acting in good faith, file a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by rule 26.1, but within the 15-day extension period provided by Rule 26.3. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 26.3; Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617-18 (Tex. 1997). Appellants must, however, offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file their notice of appeal in a timely manner. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b)(1)(C), 26.3; Jones v. City of Houston, 976 S.W.2d 676, 677 (Tex. 1998).

Appellants' late-filed motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal, which we dismiss as moot, provides the reasonable explanation for the delay. See Jones, 976 S.W.2d at 677; In re G.J.P., 314 S.W.3d 217, 221 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2010, pet. denied) (concluding that appellants provided, in late-filed motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal, reasonable explanation to support Verburgt extension).

The clerk's record has been filed. The court reporter has informed the Court that there is not a reporter's record. Appellants' brief is due on May 13, 2013.

It is so ORDERED. Judge's signature: Jane Bland

[√] Acting individually [ ] Acting for the Court


Summaries of

Ramirez v. Coca-Cola Refreshments USA, Inc.

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON
Apr 17, 2013
Appellate case number: 01-13-00278-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 17, 2013)
Case details for

Ramirez v. Coca-Cola Refreshments USA, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Gil Ramirez and Mariachi Bar & Grill LLC v. Coca-Cola Refreshments USA…

Court:COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

Date published: Apr 17, 2013

Citations

Appellate case number: 01-13-00278-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 17, 2013)