Lalita R. Morey v. Oaks of Devonshire Homeownwes Association, Inc.

Opinion issued February 3, 2026

In The

Court of Appeals
For The

First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-25-00795-CV
———————————
LALITA R. MOREY, Appellant
V.
OAKS OF DEVONSHIRE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 3
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1247947

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Lalita R. Morey, filed a notice of appeal of the trial court’s July 14,

2025 final judgment. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Any party “seek[ing] to alter the trial court’s judgment” must timely file a

notice of appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(c). Generally, a notice of appeal is due within
thirty days after the trial court signs its judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1. The

deadline to file a notice of appeal is extended to ninety days after the judgment is

signed if, within thirty days after the judgment is signed, a party timely files a motion

for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion to reinstate, or, under certain

circumstances, a request for findings of fact and conclusions of law. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 26.1(a); see also TEX. R. CIV. P. 329b. The time to file a notice of appeal

may also be extended if, within fifteen days after the deadline to file the notice of

appeal, a party files a notice of appeal and a motion for extension of time to file a

notice of appeal that complies with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.5(b). See

TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b), 26.3.

Here, the trial court signed its final judgment on July 14, 2025. The record

does not reflect that any post-judgment motions extending the notice-of-appeal

deadline were filed. Appellant’s notice of appeal was due within thirty days after

the trial court’s judgment was signed—on or before August 13, 2025—or by August

28, 2025, with a fifteen-day extension. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 26.3. Appellant

filed her notice of appeal on September 23, 2025.

Without a timely filed notice of appeal, we lack jurisdiction over an appeal.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1. On January 8, 2026, the Clerk of this Court notified

appellant that her appeal was subject to dismissal for lack of jurisdiction unless, by

January 22, 2026, appellant filed a written response demonstrating that this Court
has jurisdiction over her appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Appellant filed a

response on January 20, 2026, but it does not demonstrate that this Court has

jurisdiction over her appeal.1

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Rivas-Molloy, Guiney, and Morgan.

1
We disagree with appellant’s statement in her response that the trial court’s “July
14, 2025 [o]rder [w]as [n]ot a [f]inal, [a]ppealable [j]udgment.” Further, we note
that in her response, appellant requests, if this Court concludes that the trial court’s
July 14, 2025 judgment constituted a final judgment and her September 23, 2025
notice of appeal was too late to perfect a regular appeal, that the Court construe her
notice of appeal as notice of restricted appeal. We decline to do so because the
document filed by appellant on September 23, 2025 does not meet the requirements
of a notice of restricted appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(d)(7); see also Robles v.
State, No. 01-23-00864-CV, 2024 WL 924521, at *1–2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st
Dist.] Mar. 5, 2024, no pet.) (mem. op.) (listing requirements of restricted notice of
appeal and stating “[t]he[] requirements are jurisdictional”).