Opinion

Anthony McGill and AP McGill Enterprise, LLC v. GJG Productions, Inc.

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Filed
Jan 15, 2019
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 6.8%

The opinion

Opinion issued January 15, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

————————————

NO. 01-17-00937-CV

———————————

ANTHONY MCGILL AND AP MCGILL ENTERPRISE, LLC, Appellant

V.

GJG PRODUCTIONS, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 80th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2015-38653

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment signed September 6, 2017. Appellants,

Anthony McGill and AP McGill Enterprise, LLC, filed a motion for new trial;

therefore, appellants had 90 days from the date the judgment was signed to file

their notice of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(1). Appellants filed their notice

of appeal on December 8, 2017, three days after it was due. Appellants did not file

a motion for an extension of time.

Although this court construes notices of appeal filed within the fifteen days

following the deadline imposed by Rule 26.1(a)(1) as implied motions for an

extension of time, appealing parties are still required to provide a “reasonable

explanation” for their failure to timely file their notices of appeal. See Brown

Mech. Servs., Inc. v. Mountbatten Sur. Co., 377 S.W.3d 40, 42 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, no pet.). Appellants did not include a “reasonable

explanation” in their notice of appeal. Accordingly, on November 1, 2018, this

court sent appellants a notice informing them that their appeal may be dismissed

unless they filed within ten days a “reasonable explanation” for their untimely

notice of appeal. Appellants have not responded.

Conclusion

Because appellants have failed to file a reasonable explanation for their

untimely notice of appeal, despite being directed to do so, we dismiss this appeal

for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(b), 42.3(a), (c).

Richard Hightower

Justice

Panel consists of Justices Lloyd, Kelly, and Hightower.

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.