Opinion
No. 05-07-00747-CV
Opinion Filed May 15, 2008.
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. CC-07-06152-C.
Before Justices WRIGHT, O'NEILL, and FRANCIS.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Housing Authority for the City of Dallas filed a sworn complaint for forcible detainer against appellant Turner Mack Germany, Jr. on February 5, 2007 for violating a provision of his lease that stated "tenants, household members and guests are to refrain from acting in a manner that threatens the safety or health of another person [or] property, including DHA staff." After a bench trial, the court concluded appellant's involvement in a fight violated the lease and entered judgment in favor of the Housing Authority. The background of the case is well-known to the parties and the law is well-settled; therefore, we limit recitation of the facts and issue this memorandum opinion. Tex. R. App. P. 47.1. We affirm.
Appellant timely filed his original appeal; however, we informed him by letter his brief did not comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1. We granted his request for extension of time to file an amended brief to comply with rule 38.1. He filed an amended brief; however, the Housing Authority contends he has still failed to comply with the briefing rules. We agree.
We recognize appellant is pro se; however, 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). On appeal, the pro se appellant must properly present his case. Id. at 678.
Appellant's alleged arguments regarding violation of his civil rights and tenant rights were never presented to the trial court, and therefore, may not be considered by this Court on review. Tex. R. App. P. 33.1; Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. McKenzie, 997 S.W.2d 278, 280 (Tex. 1999). In addition, he complains that some original default judgment granted in the case is inappropriate; however, that order has not been appealed to this Court, nor is it a part of the record before us. He also contends members of the Housing Authority suppressed certain evidence regarding the assault and prevented witnesses from testifying in an effort to cover up the truth. Nothing in the record supports his allegations. To have properly presented this argument for review, appellant needed to file a motion for new trial presenting such evidence to the trial court. Tex. R. Civ. P. 324(b)(1). Accordingly, we conclude appellant has failed to preserve any of these arguments for review.
Even if appellant preserved these issues in the trial court, he has not provided a clear statement of the issues for review, nor has he cited to a single legal authority supporting any of his alleged arguments. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(e), (h). Rule 38.1(h) requires both citation to authority and substantive analysis in regard to an issue. Failure to either cite authority or advance substantive analysis waives the issue on appeal. Sunnyside Feedyard, L.C. v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 106 S.W.3d 169, 173 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 2003, no pet.); Kang v. Hyundai Corp., 992 S.W.2d 499, 503 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1999, no pet.) (failure to cite any authority constitutes waiver of alleged error). Appellant has failed to do either in regards to his alleged arguments, and we do not have a duty to perform an independent review of the record and applicable case law to determine whether error occurred. Strange, 126 S.W.3d at 678.
Lastly, appellant raises an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. He alleges his trial attorney did not respond to his concerns and did not call several witnesses to testify on his behalf. The doctrine of ineffective assistance of counsel does not extend to civil cases. McCoy v. Tex. Instruments, Inc., 183 S.W.3d 548, 553 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2006, no pet.). Thus, we overrule appellant's argument.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.