Opinion
No. 05-06-00004-CV
Opinion Filed November 9, 2006.
On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 04-00221-G.
Affirm.
Before Justices MOSELEY, FRANCIS, and MAZZANT.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Sherrie Lowe appeals the trial court's take-nothing judgment in her suit against August Park Associates, L.P., August Park Apartments, LumaCorp. Inc., and SGS Properties Inc. In a single issue, appellant complains she was denied "fundamental fairness of procedure." We affirm.
Appellant lived in August Park Apartments. In April 2001, August Park filed a forcible detainer complaint in justice of the peace court to have appellant evicted for a non-rent breach of the lease. According to appellant, appellees agreed to waive any fees due under the contract if she would vacate the premises, which appellant did. Later that year, appellant learned that appellees reported negative information about her to a credit agency. Appellant sued August Park Apartments and LumaCorp. for falsifying credit information, slander and deprivation of character, violation of privacy, negligence, and bad faith. The parties mediated the dispute and ultimately settled the claim.
In January 2004, appellant brought this lawsuit based on the same facts as the previous suit.
Appellees filed their answer asserting that appellant's claims were barred by the previous settlement agreement as well as the statute of limitations. In addition, appellees counterclaimed against appellant for breach of the settlement agreement and sought damages and attorney's fees. Both parties moved for summary judgment. The trial court denied appellant's motion and granted appellees' motion. This appeal ensued.
In a single issue, appellant, who is representing herself, complains she was denied due process of law with respect to her request for a default judgment and summary judgment. In her brief, appellant has not provided this Court with a single citation to the record to support her complaints. On May 22, 2006, this Court notified appellant that her brief did not comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38 and gave her ten days to correct specified defects, including the failure to provide record citations. Appellant did not file an amended brief. Under these circumstances, we conclude her issue is inadequately briefed. See Tex.R.App.P. 38.1 (providing that brief to this Court shall contain, among other things, concise nonargumentative statement of fact of case, suppported by record references, and clear and concise argument for contention made with appropriate citations to authorities and record); McIntyre v. Wilson, 50 S.W.3d 674, 682 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2001, pet. denied).
Moreover, appellant's complaint regarding the trial court's failure to grant her default judgment is without merit. Appellant complains appellees filed their answer late and she was therefore entitled to default judgment. The record shows that appellees filed their answer on February 13, 2004, and five days later, appellant moved for a default judgment. Thus, at the time appellant sought a default judgment, appellees had filed their answer setting out a plea in bar, affirmative defense, and special exceptions. To the extent she mentions a sanction awarded against her in connection with her motion for default judgment, appellant has not adequately briefed the issue. Additionally, our record does not contain any order granting sanctions.
As for the references to her motions for summary judgment, she does not make any specific complaint or address any particular reason why the trial court erred in denying her motions and granting appellees' motion. Consequently, there is nothing for this Court to review. We overrule appellant's sole issue.
We affirm the trial court's judgment.