Robert G. Rogers, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Perry TV, Inc., Defendant/Respondent

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District Case Style: Robert G. Rogers, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Perry TV, Inc., Defendant/Respondent Case Number: ED89908 Handdown Date: 12/04/2007 Appeal From: Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. Sidney Chaffin Counsel for Appellant: Michael P. Cohan Counsel for Respondent: Perry TV, Inc., pro se Opinion Summary: Robert Rogers appeals the circuit court's judgment in favor of Perry TV, Inc. after a trial de novo on Roger's petition for damages. DISMISSED. Division Five holds: This court lacks jurisdiction to consider Roger's appeal, because his notice of appeal to this court was untimely. Citation: Opinion Author: Patricia L. Cohen, Chief Judge Opinion Vote: DISMISSED. Shaw and Baker, JJ., concur. Opinion: Robert G. Rogers (Appellant) appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendant Perry TV, Inc. (Respondent) after a trial de novo on Appellant's petition for damages. Because Appellant's notice of appeal is untimely, the appeal is dismissed.

In civil cases, the notice of appeal is due no later than ten (10) days after the judgment becomes final. Rule 81.04(a). If no authorized after-trial motion is filed, the judgment becomes final at the expiration of thirty (30) days after the entry of judgment. Rule 81.05(a). Here, the court entered its judgment on March 12, 2007. It appears no after-trial motion was filed, and the judgment became final on April 11, 2007. Rule 81.05(a). The notice of appeal was due ten days later, on Monday, April 23, 2007. Rule 81.04(a); Rule 44.01(a). Appellant filed the notice of appeal on May 29, 2007, and it is untimely. This Court has an obligation to determine whether it has jurisdiction to consider an appeal. State v. Lynch, 192 S.W.3d 502 (Mo.App.E.D. 2006). This Court only has jurisdiction if Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. Johnson v. Summers, 596 S.W.2d 78, 79 (Mo.App.S.D. 1980). We issued an order to Appellant directing him to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed. Appellant has failed to file a response. The appeal is dismissed for lack of a timely notice of appeal. Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.