Opinion
04-23-00526-CV
11-14-2023
Bianca FOX, Appellant v. CYPRESS AT STONE OAK, Appellee
From the County Court At Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2023CV01033 Honorable Cesar Garcia, Judge Presiding
ORDER
IRENE RIOS, JUSTICE
On September 18, 2023, we struck appellant's brief for failing to comply with requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. We ordered appellant to file an amended brief that fully complied with the applicable rules. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.4(K), 38.1.
Appellant timely filed an amended brief, but it does not fully comply with the applicable rules. For example, the brief does not include a summary of the arguments containing "a succinct, clear, and accurate statement of the arguments made in the body of the brief." See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(H). THE BRIEF ALSO FAILS TO INCLUDE "A CLEAR AND CONCISE ARGUMENT OF THE CONTENTIONS MADE, WITH APPROPRIATE CITATIONS TO AUTHORITIES AND TO THE [APPELLATE] RECORD." See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(I). WE RECOGNIZE APPELLANT IS ACTING PRO SE ON APPEAL. BUT "A PRO SE LITIGANT IS HELD TO THE SAME STANDARDS AS LICENSED ATTORNEYS AND MUST COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE LAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE." Strange v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 126 S.W.3d 676, 677 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2004, pet. denied).
Nevertheless, despite the defects in the amended brief, we are not ordering appellant to file a second amended brief. However, the submission panel may determine that appellant has waived one or more issues due to inadequate briefing if the noted deficiencies are not corrected prior to submission. See Canton-Carter v. Baylor Coll. of Med., 271 S.W.3d 928, 931 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, no pet.).
Appellee's brief is due on or before December 14, 2023. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(B).