Opinion
NUMBER 13-19-00122-CV
08-01-2019
ARDELL NELSON JR., Appellant, v. LORI DAVIS, ET AL., Appellee.
On Appeal from the 343rd District Court of Bee County, Texas.
ORDER
Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Perkes
Order Per Curiam
Appellant, Ardell Nelson Jr., appearing pro se, has filed a second amended brief in this cause. On July 1, 2019, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that his amended brief failed to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1 and instructed appellant to file an amended brief. Appellant filed a second amended brief on July 19, 2019.
We liberally construe pro se pleadings and briefs; however, we hold pro se litigants to the same standards as licensed attorneys and require them to comply with applicable laws and rules of procedure. Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181, 184-85 (Tex. 1978); In re N.E.B., 251 S.W.3d 211, 211-12 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.). To do otherwise would give a pro se litigant an unfair advantage over a litigant who is represented by counsel. Shull v. United Parcel Serv., 4 S.W.3d 46, 53 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, pet. denied).
Upon review of the appellant's second amended brief, we find that the brief contains numerous formal defects and that the case has not been properly presented. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9. The brief fails to comply with Rule 9.5 (e) and 38.1 (b), (c), (d), (f), (g), (h), and (k) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. A certificate of service is required. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5 (e). The brief does not contain a table of contents with references to the pages of the brief as required by Rule 38.1(b); does not contain an index of authorities arranged alphabetically and indicating the pages of the brief where the authorities are cited as required by Rule 38.1(c); does not state concisely and without argument the facts pertinent to the issues or points presented supported by record references as required by Rule 38.1(d); does not contain all issues or points presented for review as required by Rule 38.1(f); does not contain record references in the statement of facts as required by Rule 38.1(g); does not contain a succinct, clear, and accurate statement of the arguments made in the body of the brief as required by Rule 38.1(h); does not contain a clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities and to the record as required by Rule 38.1(i); and does not contain an appendix as required by Rule 38.1(k).
Accordingly, under the authority of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.9(a) and (b), we STRIKE appellant's second amended brief. Appellant is hereby ORDERED to file an amended brief with this Court that complies with the above rules within fifteen days from the date of this order.
If appellant files an amended brief that fails to comply with this order of the Court and the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Court may strike the brief, prohibit appellant from filing another, and proceed as if appellant had failed to file a brief. See id. 38.9(a). Under such circumstances, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and appellant's failure to comply with this Court's directive and the appellate rules. See id. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b),(c).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 1st day of August, 2019.