Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
The trial court entered final judgment in the underlying Harris County case on October 10, 2024. Appellant Caryn Craig later sought judgment nunc pro tunc, but the trial court denied that motion on February 4, 2026 and denied her motion to reconsider on March 9, 2026.
Craig appealed those two orders. On July 9, 2026, the First Court of Appeals directed the parties to explain in writing why it had jurisdiction and warned that the appeal could be dismissed without further notice after the 14-day response period. Neither party responded.
The Court’s Holding
The court held that an order denying a motion for judgment nunc pro tunc is not appealable. It also explained that filing a motion for judgment nunc pro tunc does not extend the deadline to appeal the underlying final judgment.
Because Craig attempted to appeal only nonappealable orders, the court dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(a).
Key Takeaways
- The denial of a motion for judgment nunc pro tunc is not an independently appealable order under Texas law.
- A motion for judgment nunc pro tunc does not extend the deadline to file a notice of appeal from the final judgment.
- When the appellate court requested briefing on jurisdiction, neither party responded, and the court dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that post-judgment nunc pro tunc practice cannot be used to revive an expired appellate deadline. Litigants must timely appeal the final judgment and independently confirm that any later order they seek to challenge is appealable.