Yes, the filing of a motion to reinstate does extend the plenary power of the court in Texas, provided that the motion is verified and filed within the required timeframe.
In Texas, a verified motion to reinstate a case, if filed within thirty days of a dismissal for want of prosecution, extends the trial court’s plenary power in the same manner as a motion for new trial. This extension allows the court to retain jurisdiction over the case beyond the initial thirty days following the order of dismissal. However, it is crucial that the motion to reinstate is verified; an unverified motion does not extend the trial court’s plenary power or the time in which to file a notice of appeal In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 722, Abraham v. Acton, 539 S.W.3d 521, Mansaray v. Phillips, 626 S.W.3d 402.
The verification requirement is liberally construed, allowing for substitutions such as affidavits in place of a formal verification Silguero v. State, 287 S.W.3d 146. If the motion is not verified or is not filed within the thirty-day period, the trial court’s plenary power expires, and any orders signed after this period are considered void In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 722, Abraham v. Acton, 539 S.W.3d 521, Mansaray v. Phillips, 626 S.W.3d 402.
Supporting Content:
In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 722 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Nov 15, 2012
Abraham v. Acton, 539 S.W.3d 521 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Jan 17, 2018
Mansaray v. Phillips, 626 S.W.3d 402 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | May 25, 2021
Silguero v. State, 287 S.W.3d 146 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Jan 30, 2009
Legal Standards/Rules:
Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 165a(3), (4), a trial court has plenary power to reinstate a case within thirty days after it signs an order of dismissal for want of prosecution. In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 722, Iolap, Inc. v. On Deck Mgmt., 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 1437. A verified motion to reinstate a case filed within thirty days of a dismissal for want of prosecution extends the trial court’s plenary power in the same manner as a motion for new trial. In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 722, Iolap, Inc. v. On Deck Mgmt., 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 1437, Pena v. Cooper Outdoor Adver., Inc., 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 2826. However, an unverified motion to reinstate is a nullity and does not extend the trial court’s plenary jurisdiction or the time in which to file a notice of appeal. In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 722, Hosea v. Whittenburg, 311 S.W.3d 704, In re Romero, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 2.
Our Analysis:
The filing of a verified Motion to Reinstate within thirty days of a dismissal for want of prosecution extends the plenary power of the court in Texas. In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 722, Pena v. Cooper Outdoor Adver., Inc., 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 2826.
This extension is similar to the extension granted by a motion for a new trial. However, it is crucial that the motion to reinstate is verified. An unverified motion does not extend the trial court’s plenary power nor the time in which to perfect an appeal. Andrews v. Stanton, 198 S.W.3d 4, Kaylor v. Bell, 1999 Tex. App. LEXIS 2003.
If a verified motion to reinstate is not filed within the thirty-day window following the final judgment, the trial court’s plenary jurisdiction expires thirty days after the date the trial court signed the final order of dismissal. Novoa v. Viramontes, 553 S.W.3d 45, Wright v. R.R. Comm’n of Tex., 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 4174, BROWN v. DALLAS COUNTY, 1998 Tex. App. LEXIS 651.
After the trial court’s plenary power expires, it can take no further action on the case. Westbrook v. Heirs of Crockett, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 3500, In re Saving Grace #2, LLC, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 7839.
The time limits provided in Rule 165a are mandatory and jurisdictional; orders of reinstatement entered after their expiration are void. In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 722, In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 729, In re Johnson, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 8966.
In conclusion, the filing of a verified Motion to Reinstate within thirty days of a dismissal for want of prosecution extends the plenary power of the court in Texas.
However, an unverified motion does not extend the trial court’s plenary power nor the time in which to perfect an appeal Andrews v. Stanton, 198 S.W.3d 4, Kaylor v. Bell, 1999 Tex. App. LEXIS 2003. If a verified motion is not filed within the required timeframe, the trial court’s plenary power expires, and any orders of reinstatement entered after their expiration are void Wright v. R.R. Comm’n of Tex., 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 4174, In re Romero, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 2.
Supporting Content:
In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 722 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Nov 15, 2012
Iolap, Inc. v. On Deck Mgmt., 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 1437 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Feb 22, 2018
Iolap, Inc. v. On Deck Mgmt., 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 1437 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Feb 22, 2018
Pena v. Cooper Outdoor Adver., Inc., 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 2826 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Apr 12, 2007
Hosea v. Whittenburg, 311 S.W.3d 704 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Apr 29, 2010
In re Romero, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 2 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Jan 4, 2022
Pena v. Cooper Outdoor Adver., Inc., 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 2826 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Apr 12, 2007
Andrews v. Stanton, 198 S.W.3d 4 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Jan 5, 2006
Kaylor v. Bell, 1999 Tex. App. LEXIS 2003 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Mar 25, 1999
Novoa v. Viramontes, 553 S.W.3d 45 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Apr 27, 2018
Wright v. R.R. Comm’n of Tex., 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 4174 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Jun 15, 2023
BROWN v. DALLAS COUNTY, 1998 Tex. App. LEXIS 651 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Feb 2, 1998
Westbrook v. Heirs of Crockett, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 3500 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | May 17, 2018
In re Saving Grace #2, LLC, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 7839 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Oct 13, 2023
In re Valliance Bank, 422 S.W.3d 729 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Mar 21, 2013
In re Johnson, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 8966 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Nov 30, 2023
In re Romero, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 2 | TX Court of Appeals and Court of Civil Appeals Cases from 1892 | Cases | Texas | Jan 4, 2022