Opinion
No. 05-06-00040-CV.
Opinion issued February 7, 2007
On Appeal from the 192nd District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 03-11609-K.
Before Justices WRIGHT, BRIDGES, and MAZZANT.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Delores Floyd and Larry N. Floyd appeal the trial court's judgment awarding them damages on their claims against Brittany Slaughter and ordering that they should take nothing on their claims against Donald R. Evans, d/b/a Evans Escort Service. Without setting forth issues for this Court's review, the Floyds appear to argue generally that juror misconduct occurred in the underlying case. We note that the Floyds were notified by the Clerk of this Court that their initial brief did not comply with the rules of appellate procedure. After this Court granted an extension of time for filing an amended brief, the Floyds subsequently filed an amended brief which also fails to comply with the rules of appellate procedure. We affirm the trial court's judgment.
The underlying case arose out of an automobile accident in which Delores Floyd was driving her husband, Larry, in a car that was part of a funeral procession. Evans had been retained to escort the funeral procession. A vehicle driven by Slaughter struck the Floyds' vehicle, injuring them. Following a jury trial, the trial court awarded damages against Slaughter but entered a judgment that the Floyds should take nothing on their claims against Evans. This appeal followed.
The law is well established that, to present an issue to this Court, a party's brief shall contain, among other things, a concise, nonargumentative statement of the facts of the case, supported by record references, and a clear and concise argument for the contention made with appropriate citations to authorities and the record. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1; McIntyre v. Wilson, 50 S.W.3d 674, 682 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2001, pet. denied). Bare assertions of error, without argument or authority, waive error. See Sullivan v. Bickel Brewer, 943 S.W.2d 477, 486 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1995, writ denied); see also Fredonia State Bank v. Gen. Am. Life Ins. Co., 881 S.W.2d 279, 284 (Tex. 1994) (appellate court has discretion to waive point of error due to inadequate briefing). When a party fails to adequately brief a complaint, he waives the issue on appeal. Devine v. Dallas County, 130 S.W.3d 512, 514 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2004, no pet.); Howell v. T S Commc'ns, Inc., 130 S.W.3d 515, 518 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2004, no pet.).
The Floyds set forth no issues for this Court's review. The Floyds have failed to provide us with argument, analysis, or authorities that make their appellate complaints viable. See Howell, 130 S.W.3d at 518. By failing to adequately brief their complaints, the Floyds have waived our review of their complaints. See Sullivan, 943 S.W.2d at 486 (concluding appellant had waived points not supported by argument and authority). The Floyds summarize their argument as follows: "(Your HONORS the results, of said Cause/Case would have -been 100 % difference, if some of the (JUORS) would have not got together, and changed the other (JUORS MINDS)." However, the Floyds cite no authorities or relevant parts of the record to support their arguments. Accordingly, we need not further address the Floyds' claims.
We affirm the trial court's judgment.