B.R., Appellant-Petitioner v. S.W., Appellee-Respondent. (2025)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] B.R. (“B.R.”), pro se, appeals the trial court's denial of his motion for contempt against S.W. (“S.W.”). However, we dismiss this appeal because B.R. has forfeited his right to appeal by failing to file a timely notice of appeal and failing to offer any extraordinarily compelling reason to restore the forfeited appeal.

[2] Because of our disposition of this appeal, we will not delve into detailed facts. This case stems from an underlying case in which the trial court granted B.R.’s petition for a protective order against S.W. Specifically, in April 2024, B.R. filed a pro se petition for a protective order against S.W. In May 2024, following a hearing, the trial court granted B.R.’s petition and issued an order for the protection of B.R. against S.W. A few months later, in October 2024, B.R. filed a pro se motion for contempt against S.W. and alleged that S.W. had violated the protective order. The trial court held a two-part hearing on B.R.’s contempt motion in December 2024 and February 2025.¹ Thereafter, on March 3, 2025, the trial court denied B.R.’s contempt motion. B.R. then filed a motion for reconsideration on March 13, 2025. The trial court did not rule on the motion within five days; therefore, pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 53.4(B), the motion was deemed denied on March 18.² Thereafter, B.R. filed a notice of appeal on April 22, 2025. In his notice of appeal, B.R. indicated that he was appealing the trial court's March 2025 order denying his motion for reconsideration.

[3] Indiana Appellate Rule 9(A)(1) provides that a party who wishes to appeal must “initiate[ ] an appeal by filing a Notice of Appeal with the Clerk ․ within thirty (30) days after the entry of a Final Judgment is noted in the Chronological Case Summary.” Ind. Appellate Rule 9(A)(1). Additionally, Appellate Rule 9(A)(5) provides that “[u]nless the Notice of Appeal is timely filed, the right to appeal shall be forfeited except as provided by P.C.R. 2.”

[4] Here, the trial court denied B.R.’s contempt motion on March 3, 2025. Therefore, B.R. was required to file his notice of appeal by April 2, 2025. B.R.’s motion to reconsider did not extend the deadline for filing his notice of appeal. See Indiana Trial Rule 53.4(A) (providing that a motion to reconsider “shall not ․ extend the time for any further required or permitted action, motion, or proceedings under these rules”). See also J.K. v. S.H., -- N.E.3d --, 2025 WL 2460027 at *3 (Ind. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2025). B.R., however, did not file his notice of appeal until April 22, 2025, which was twenty days late. Pursuant to Appellate Rule 9(A)(5), B.R.’s failure to timely file his notice of appeal with our Court results in his “right to appeal ․ be[ing] forfeited[.]” We acknowledge that our Court has discretion to reinstate a forfeited appeal if an appellant shows that there are “extraordinarily compelling reasons” to do so. See State v. B.H., 260 N.E.3d 953, 959 (Ind. 2025) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted); Cooper's Hawk Indianapolis, LLC v. Ray, 162 N.E.3d 1097, 1098 (Ind. 2021) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). B.R., however, has not made that required showing. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal as untimely.

[5] Dismissed.³

FOOTNOTES

1.   The transcript from the contempt hearing is not included in the record on appeal. On June 2 and 3, 2025, our Court issued an order and an amended order, noting that B.R. had failed to make arrangements for the payment of the transcript and that the appeal would proceed without the transcript.

2.   Indiana Trial Rule 53.4(B) provides that a motion to reconsider “shall be deemed denied” when it is not ruled upon within five days. We note that on March 31, 2025, the trial court nevertheless entered an order denying B.R.’s motion to reconsider.

3.   We note that B.R. filed a motion to strike and that, contemporaneously with the handdown of this opinion, we are denying the motion as moot.

Pyle, Judge.

Vaidik, J., and Mathias, J., concur.