Opinion
No. 05-04-01019-CV
Opinion filed November 10, 2005.
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 02-13079-A.
Dismiss.
Before Chief Justice THOMAS and Justices LANG-MIERS and MAZZANT.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A review of this appeal shows that appellant filed her original brief on January 10, 2005, and the case was scheduled to be submitted to a panel of this Court on June 7, 2005. However, by order dated May 24, 2005, this appeal was removed from the submission docket because appellant's brief failed to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1(b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and (h). Appellant was given thirty days to redraw her brief and was warned that if she failed to file a brief that complied with rule 38.1, this Court could strike the brief and dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution or affirm the trial court's judgment on the basis of appellee's brief. See Tex.R.App.P. 38.8, 38.9. On July 29, appellant submitted an untimely brief that again failed to comply with the rules, and the Court did not file the brief. By letter dated September 28, 2005, we notified appellant of the deficiencies and gave appellant ten days to file an amended brief that complied with the rules of appellate procedure. Thirty days later, appellant filed the amended brief that is now before this Court. While appellant has corrected some of the defects of the prior briefs (adding a table of contents and conclusion), she does not provide a single reference to the record or cite any legal authority to support her argument.
The rules of appellate procedure require that a brief filed with this Court 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(f), (h); McIntyre v. Wilson, 50 S.W.3d 674, 682 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2001, pet. denied).
Under the circumstances, we conclude appellant's amended brief does not substantially comply with the rules of appellate procedure. See Tex.R.App.P. 38.9. Moreover, we note that this appeal has been pending since June 2004, and the record has been on file since October 2004. While appellant has been given multiple opportunities to correct the deficiencies in her brief, she has failed to do so. Therefore, on the Court's own motion, we STRIKE as deficient appellant's January 10, 2005 original brief, July 29, 2005 first amended brief and October 28, 2005 second amended brief. As there is no appellant's brief on file in this appeal, we DISMISS this appeal. See Tex.R.App.P. 38.8, 38.9 42.3.