Opinion
04-21-00535-CV
05-24-2023
THE TEXAS BRANDON CORPORATION, INC. and Ronald Wilson, Appellants v. EOG RESOURCES, INC., Karbuhn Oil Company, Robert E. Brandt, Chad E. Brandt, Joachim K. Leicht, Dick A. Tracy, and Alicat Energy, LLC Appellees
From the 218th Judicial District Court, Karnes County, Texas Trial Court No. 16-03-00066-CVK Honorable Lynn Ellison, Judge Presiding
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Irene Rios, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Irene Rios, Justice
Appellants The Texas Brandon Corporation, Inc. ("TTBC") and Ronald Wilson attempt to appeal two agreed judgments to which TTBC and Wilson are not parties, a final judgment rendered against TTBC and Wilson, and an order severing all claims asserted against or by TTBC and Wilson. We affirm.
Background
This is the second appeal regarding TTBC and Wilson's claims to mineral interests under a joint venture agreement known as the Great Western Oil Venture. In the first appeal, TTBC and Wilson sought recovery of a 4.1176% working interest from a producing gas well on a pooled unit covered by three gas leases. See The Tex. Brandon Cop., Inc. v. EOG Res., Inc., No. 04-19-00403-CV, 2020 WL 7232135, at *1 (Tex. App.-San Antonio Dec. 9, 2020, pet. denied), cert. denied, 142 S.Ct. 44 (2021). TTBC and Wilson sued EOG Resources, Inc. ("EOG"), Fred Levine, "and others" for trespass to try title, declaratory judgment, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, gross negligence, conversion, fraud, and discrimination claims. See id. After the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Levine and EOG on TTBC and Wilson's claims, it severed those claims and TTBC and Wilson appealed that judgment. Id. In that appeal, we held TTBC and Wilson waived appellate review due to inadequate briefing and affirmed the trial court's judgment. Id. at *2.
It is unclear what claims by and against TTBC and Wilson remained pending before the trial court after disposition of the first appeal. Based on the record before us, it appears TTBC and Wilson may have been asserting claims relating to an overriding royalty interest in the three gas leases. Notwithstanding the uncertainty surrounding the remaining claims asserted by and against TTBC and Wilson, the trial court-subsequent to disposition of the first appeal-granted a final judgment against TTBC and Wilson stating:
The Court hereby enters into this Final Judgment which shall finalize and dispose of any and all claims brought by Plaintiffs, [TTBC], [TTBC's] owner Ron Wilson in his individual capacity, Shirley Green, and American Crude, Inc. (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Plaintiffs") along with any successors and assigns of Plaintiffs against Defendant EOG RESOURCES, INC. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") and Third Party Defendants Karbuhn Oil Company, Robert E. Brandt, Joachim K. Leicht, Dick A. Tracy, Chad E. Brandt, and Alicat Energy, LLC (hereinafter referred to as "Third Party Defendants") along with any and all counterclaims brought by Defendant and Third Party Defendants against Plaintiffs.
On February 21, 2019, this Court rendered its Order Granting Third Party Defendants' Traditional Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, which order is incorporated herein by reference.
In keeping with the Court's Summary Judgment Order incorporated herein, the Court hereby ORDERS, ADJUDGES, AND DECREES, and enters as its Final Judgment for the following:
a) The Great Western Oil Venture's Joint Venture Agreement ("JVA") did not name [TTBC] or its sole owner Ron Wilson as an owner of any overriding royalty interest and therefore, [TTBC] and Ron Wilson cannot maintain any of the causes of action against Defendant and/or Third Party Defendants relating to ownership of any alleged overriding royalty interest or any claim derivative thereof.
b) The JVA did not vest in the Plaintiffs, or any of them, title to any overriding royalty interest, or other interest of any kind, in those leases commonly referred to in this lawsuit as the Schnitz Lease, Riedel Lease, or Frels Lease, nor did Plaintiffs, or any of them, ever own or acquire any such interest.
c) Third Party Defendants and Defendant waive any and all claims that they may have had against Plaintiffs for attorney's fees, unjust enrichment, and money had and received.
This Judgment is final, appealable, and disposes of all claims and all parties. All relief not specifically granted herein is denied.
"[A] clear and unequivocal statement of finality must be given effect even if review of the record would undermine finality." Bella Palma, LLC v. Young, 601 S.W.3d 799, 801 (Tex. 2020) (internal quotation marks omitted) ("Having received this 'clear and unequivocal' statement that the trial court had intended to render a final judgment . . ., the court of appeals had no authority to review the record and arrive at a contrary conclusion.").
The trial court also granted a motion to sever "all causes of action and claims asserted among Third-Party Defendants and [TTBC, Wilson, Green, and American Crude, Inc.]". TTBC and Wilson appeal.
Brief Waiver
Wilson, who is an attorney, represents himself and TTBC on appeal. In their brief, TTBC and Wilson state the trial court "erred in excluding and failing to consider critical evidence" and its decision "is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of this evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust." TTBC and Wilson further state the trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter the two agreed judgments, stating one agreed judgment "is in the wrong court" and the trial court erred "in approving this Final Judgment." TTBC and Wilson state the other agreed judgment "was not within our jurisdiction" and the trial court erred "in granting this approval." As to the final judgment rendered against them, TTBC and Wilson argue "[t]here is no way any of the Appellants would agree to this proposal" because it "does not hold any of the Appellees liable for any damages."
We note that TTBC and Wilson are not parties to these agreed judgments, and it appears they have no right to complain about either agreed judgment.
In response, the appellees each assert that TTBC and Wilson have waived their appellate complaints by failing to brief them in accordance with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. We agree with the appellees' contention that TTBC and Wilson have waived their appellate complaints because they are inadequately briefed.
"It is well-settled that an appellant's brief must contain clear and concise arguments with appropriate citations to authorities and the record." Neira v. Scully, No 04-14-00687-CV, 2015 WL 4478009, at *1 (Tex App-San Antonio July 22, 2015, no pet) (mem op); see also RSL Funding, LLC v Newsome, 569 S.W.3d 116, 126 (Tex 2018) ("A brief must provide citations or argument and analysis for the contentions [made] and failure to do this can result in waiver"); Eco Planet, LLC v ANT Trading, No 05-19-00239-CV, 2020 WL 6707561, at *5 (Tex App- Dallas Nov 16, 2020, pet denied) (mem op) (Osborne, J, concurring) ("[Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure] require[s] appellants to state their complaint concisely; to provide understandable, succinct, and clear argument for why their complaint has merit in fact and in law; and to cite and apply law that is applicable to their complaint along with record references that are appropriate.").
"[I]t is the appellant's burden to discuss his assertions of error, and we have no duty-or even right-to perform an independent review of the record and applicable law to determine whether there was error." Neira, 2015 WL 4478009, at *1 (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted). "Conclusory statements unsupported by legal or record citations do not satisfy this requirement, and failure to provide substantive analysis will result in a waiver of complaints." The Tex. Brandon Corp., Inc., 2020 WL 7232135, at *1 (citing Canton-Carter v. Baylor Coll. Of Med., 271 S.W.3d 928, 931 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, no pet.)). "[W]e cannot speculate as to the substance of the specific issues appellant claims we must address." Strange v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 126 S.W.3d 676, 678 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2004, pet. denied), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1076 (2005). "An issue on appeal unsupported by argument or citation to any legal authority presents nothing for the court to review." Id.
Here, TTBC and Wilson's brief does not contain a clear and concise legal argument with appropriate citations to authorities. TTBC and Wilson cite only three cases in their brief. The citations of the first two cases do not match the style or jurisdiction provided in the brief. The brief represents that the two authorities are opinions issued by the Texas Supreme Court; however, one citation refers to an opinion issued by the Tyler Court of Appeals and the other citation refers to an opinion issued by a Missouri appellate court. Appellees contend TTBC and Wilson fabricated these two authorities. We note the cited authorities do not stand for the propositions asserted by TTBC and Wilson and do not support their arguments on appeal.
The third case-pertaining to whether a severance should be granted-is accurately cited; however, the case does not stand for the proposition asserted in the brief. In fact, the third case supports a proposition in direct conflict with the argument asserted by TTBC and Wilson. Moreover, TTBC and Wilson fail to provide any analysis beyond stating: "This motion for severance does not even meet the criteria of the [s]everance."
TTBC and Wilson's brief does not identify an applicable standard of review, fails to provide clear and concise arguments, and fails to provide any substantive legal analysis on the issues they attempt to present on appeal. See Tex.R.App.P. 38.1(f), (h), (i); Canton-Carter, 271 S.W.3d at 931. While they complain the trial court excluded critical evidence, TTBC and Wilson do not point to any evidence presented to-or excluded by-the trial court in the hearing on the three judgments. Without providing references to the record or authority as to why the trial court should not have rendered the three judgments, the brief repeatedly asserts it was error to render those judgments.
Further, TTBC and Wilson do not present clear and concise arguments supporting their contentions. Instead, their brief consists of a series of conclusory statements and allegations. For example, the brief provides the following assertions:
• The response to the Notice for Final Judgment and Severance, by Appellants attorney (Appendix 1) which adopts the opposite effect. It was not even as Tex. R. of Civ. P. Rule 54, conditions precedent had not been satisfied. To assume that Final Judgments did away with Texas Brandon Corporation, Inc. from the defendants Final Judgments Motions, (Appendix 2-5) to the Final Judgment of the Plaintiffs, which recognizes the life of the corporation is the total opposite.
• The State Prosecutor should look at this case.
• This is a criminal act with civil impact.
• [The trial court] assisted Criminal Trespass.
The brief goes on to claim one of the appellees' attorneys committed aggravated perjury and assisted the appellees with criminal trespass. As in their previous appeal, "[t]hese allegations are surrounded by disjointed factual assertions, rhetorical questions, and cryptic complaints." The Tex. Brandon Corp., Inc., 2020 WL 7232135, at *2.
"We may not perform an independent review of the record and applicable law to craft these allegations into a coherent legal argument." See id. (citing Canton-Carter, 271 S.W.3d at 931- 32). "To do so would mean we would abandon our roles as judges and become advocates for TTBC and Wilson." Id. Because TTBC and Wilson have not supported their appellate issue with citation to any legal authority or substantive legal argument, they have presented nothing for us to review. Strange, 126 S.W.3d at 678. "[E]ven though we generally disfavor resolving an appeal on inadequate briefing," we again hold TTBC and Wilson have waived their issues on appeal by failing to provide any substantive legal argument that might make their complaints viable. See The Tex. Brandon Corp., Inc., 2020 WL 7232135, at *2.
Conclusion
We affirm the trial court's judgment.
AFFIRMED