Opinion
No. 04-13-00612-CV
12-05-2013
Sage M. BARRERA and Jenesey Barrera, Appellants v. Dean T. CHERER, Appellee
From the County Court, Guadalupe County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2013-CV-0077
Charles Ramsay, Judge Presiding
ORDER
Appellants filed their brief on November 27, 2013. The brief does not comply with Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. Specifically, the brief violates Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1 in that it does not: (1) include a table of contents; (2) include a statement of facts with record references; (3) include argument with appropriate citation to authorities and the appellate record; or (4) include an appendix. See id. R. 38.1(b) (requiring table of contents); 38.1(g) (requiring statement of facts with record reference); 38.1(i) (requiring argument with appropriate citation to authority and record); 38.1(k) (requiring appendix with copy of judgment or other appealable order, any jury charge and verdict form, any findings of fact and conclusions of law, and text of applicable rules, regulations, ordinances, statutes, constitutional provisions, or other law on which argument is based, or any contract or other document central to argument). Moreover, the brief does not comply with Rules 9.1 and 9.5. See id. R. 9.1(b) (requiring parties not represented by counsel to sign any document filed and give party's mailing address, telephone number, and fax number, if any), 9.5(a) (requiring party filing document to serve copy on all parties to proceeding), 9.5(d) (requiring document presented for filing to contain proof of service in form of acknowledgment of service by person served or certificate of service in accordance with Rule 9.5(e)).
Appellants are advised that as pro se litigants, they must comply with all applicable procedural rules, and are held to the same standards as a licensed attorney. Paselk v. Rabun, 293 S.W.3d 600, 611 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2009, pet. denied); Sweed v. City of El Paso, 346 S.W.3d 679, 680 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2009, pet. denied). Pro se litigants are required to properly present their case on appeal. Sweed, 346 S.W.3d at 680-81. Accordingly, appellants must file a brief in compliance with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, including Rules 9.1, 9.4, 9.5, and 38.1.
Although substantial compliance with Rule 38.1 is generally sufficient, this court may order a party to amend, supplement, or redraw a brief if it flagrantly violates Rule 38.1. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a). We conclude that the formal defects described above constitute flagrant violations of Rule 38.1.
Accordingly, we ORDER appellants' brief stricken and ORDER appellants to file an amended brief in this court on or before December 16, 2013. The amended brief must correct the violations listed above and fully comply with the applicable rules. See, e.g., id. R. 9.1, 9.4, 9.5, and 38.1. If the amended brief does not comply with this order, we "may strike the brief, prohibit [appellant] from filing another, and proceed as if [appellant] had failed to file a brief." See id. R. 38.9(a); see also id. R. 38.8(a) (authorizing this court to dismiss appeal if appellant fails to timely file brief). We may also accept the amended brief, but upon review, find appellants' issues waived due to inadequate briefing.
If appellants timely file a brief that complies with this order, appellee's brief will be due thirty days after appellants' amended brief is filed. See id. R. 38.6(b).
____________
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 5th day of December, 2013.
____________
Keith E. Hottle
Clerk of Court