Opinion
No. 05-10-00831-CV
01-11-2012
DAVID SCOT LYND, Appellant v. STATE FAIR OF TEXAS AND CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS, Appellee
DISMISS; Opinion Filed January 11, 2012.
On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-10-02288-C
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Morris, Richter, and Lang-Miers
Opinion By Justice Lang-Miers
The trial court issued a permanent injunction against appellant David Scot Lynd ordering him to cease and desist from his attempts to foreclose and convey real property in Fair Park, Dallas, Texas, owned by the City of Dallas and used by the State Fair of Texas for an annual fair and exposition. After Lynd filed a notice of appeal from the trial court's judgment, his attorney withdrew and Lynd, representing himself, filed an appellant's brief. We notified him that the brief was deficient and instructed him to file an amended brief that complied with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Our notice to Lynd stated that his "[f]ailure to file an amended brief that complies with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure within ten days of the date of this letter may result in dismissal of this appeal without further notice from the Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b),(c)." Lynd filed an amended brief which addressed some of the deficiencies, but the amended brief is also deficient in several respects. Because the amended brief does not comply with long-established briefing rules, we dismiss appellant's appeal.
Background
Lynd sought to foreclose and sell real property in Fair Park in payment for services Lynd performed for a contractor hired by the State Fair to provide a manufactured home exhibit during the 2000 state fair. The State Fair brought a declaratory judgment action against Lynd, and the City intervened. The City and the State Fair prevailed below. On appeal, Lynd argues that this "case involves an illegal T.R.O. and Injunction obtained through fraud to stop the enforcement of a perfected mechanics lien and a Texas State Constitutional lien." He argues that he "holds a timely and perfected mechanics lien, and a perfected Self-Executing Texas Constitutional lien on the named property, for work performed." And he contends that the trial court erred "in numerous ways to the point that the case has become close to impossible to properly address."
Applicable Law
A party to civil litigation in Texas has the right to represent himself at trial and on appeal. Tex. R. Civ. P. 7; Bolling v. Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist., 315 S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2010, no pet.). This right carries with it the responsibility to adhere to our rules of evidence and procedure, including the rules of appellate procedure if the party chooses to represent himself at the appeal level. See Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181, 184-85 (Tex. 1978); Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895. Courts regularly caution pro se litigants that they will not be treated differently from a party who is represented by a licensed attorney. See Mansfield, 573 S.W.2d at 184-85; Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895.
Rules for Briefs on Appeal
Our appellate rules have specific requirements for briefing. Tex. R. App. P. 38. These rules require an appellant to state concisely his complaints; to provide understandable, succinct, and clear arguments for why his complaints have merit in fact and in law; to cite and apply law that is applicable to the complaints being made; and to make appropriate citations to the record. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(f)-(i).
To comply with rule 38.1(f), an appellant must articulate the issues we will be asked to decide. From our perspective, we must be able to discern what questions of law we will be answering. If we have to speculate or guess about the appellant's contentions, then the brief fails. Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 896. To comply with rule 38.1(g), an appellant must also provide a concise statement of the facts pertinent to the issues, without argument, and supported by direct references to the record that are precise in locating the facts asserted. If record references are not made, the brief fails. Id.
Rule 38.1(i) also calls for the brief to guide us through an appellant's arguments with clear and understandable statements of the contentions being made. It requires an appellant to cite existing legal authority that is applicable to the facts and the questions we are called on to answer. References to sweeping statements of general law without analysis to the issues presented and without supporting record references do not comply with the appellate briefing rules. Id.
Our Review of Compliance with Briefing Rules
We may discharge our responsibility to review an appeal and make a decision that disposes of an appeal only when we are provided with proper briefing. We are not responsible for identifying possible trial court error or for searching the record for facts that may be favorable to a party's position. Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895; see Fredonia State Bank v. Gen. Am. Life Ins. Co., 881 S.W.2d 279, 283-84 (Tex. 1994). We do not adhere to any rigid rules about the form of a brief when deciding whether an appellant's brief is deficient. We do, however, examine briefs for compliance with the briefing rules. We examine every brief closely. If we can conclude that a brief complies with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we submit the appeal for review and a decision on the merits. If we cannot, we may dismiss the appeal as we are authorized to do by our appellate rules. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.
Discussion
In this case, Lynd filed a deficient brief. The clerk of the court sent Lynd written notice that his appellant's brief was deficient in 14 different ways:
* It does not contain a complete list of all parties to the trial court's judgment or order appealed from, with the names and addresses of all trial and appellate counsel. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(a).
* It does not contain a table of contents with references to the pages of the brief. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(b).
* The table of contents does not indicate the subject matter of each issue or point, or group of issues or points. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(b).
* It does not contain an index of authorities arranged alphabetically and indicating the pages of the brief where the authorities are cited. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(c).
* It does not contain a concise statement of the case, the course of proceedings, and the trail [sic] court's disposition of the case supported by record references. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(d).
* It does not concisely state all issues or points presented for review. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(e).
* It does not contain a concise statement of the facts supported by record references. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(f).
* It does not contain a succinct, clear, and accurate statement of the arguments made in the body of the brief. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(g).
* The argument does not contain appropriate citations to the record. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(h).
*It does not contain a proper certificate of service. Tex. R. App. P. 9.5(e).
* [T]he following is omitted from the appendix. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(j).
*The trial court's judgment. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(j)(1)(A).
*The jury charge and verdict, if any, or the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law, if any. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(j)(1)(B).
*The text of any rule, regulation, ordinance, statute, constitutional provision, or other law (excluding case law) on which the argument is based. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(j)(1)(C).
*The text of any contract or other document that is central to the argument. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(j)(1)(C).
Lynd filed an amended brief, but it did not cure most of these specific deficiencies. For example, although the amended brief contains a section labeled "Statement of Facts," the content of that section is argument. The brief does not contain a concise statement, without argument, of "the facts pertinent to the issues or points presented" with citations to the record. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(g). And the amended brief lists 16 issues on appeal, but most of those issues are not understandable and do not appear to comport with the complaints made below. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(f). In addition, the amended brief contains only one argument section to address all 16 issues, with general statements of law, no analysis of the legal authorities cited, no citations to the record, and no application of the law to the facts or issues in the case. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(i). In fact, Lynd's brief does not contain a single reference to the record or any argument about how the record supports his issues. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(g), (i).
Because appellant has failed to comply with the briefing requirements of our appellate rules after having been given the opportunity to do so, we dismiss his appeal.
ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS
JUSTICE
100831F.P05