Opinion
No. 04-13-00177-CV
07-10-2013
Gerald PORTER, Appellant v. Lydia SERNA, Galan G., Jessica M. Garcia, Lorraine Salas, Cheryl Lawson, Appellees
From the 218th Judicial District Court, Karnes County, Texas
Trial Court No. 12-07-00162-CV
Honorable Ron Carr, Judge Presiding
ORDER
Appellant filed his brief on July 3, 2013. The brief does not comply with Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. Specifically, the brief violates Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1 in that it does not: (1) include a brief statement of the issues presented; (2) include a statement of facts with record references; (3) include a succinct, clear, and accurate statement of the arguments made in the body of the brief; (4) include argument with appropriate citation to authorities and the appellate record; (5) include a prayer stating the nature of the relief sought; or (6) include an appendix. See id. R. 38.1(f) (requiring statement of issues presented), 38.1(g) (requiring statement of facts with record reference), 38.1(h) (requiring succinct, clear, and accurate statement of argument made in body of brief), 38.1(i) (requiring argument with appropriate citation to authority and record; 38.1(j) (requiring prayer stating nature of relief sought), 38.1(k) (requiring appendix with copy of judgment or other appealable order, any jury charge and verdict form, any findings of fact and conclusions of law, and text of applicable rules, regulations, ordinances, statutes, constitutional provisions, or other law on which argument is based, or any contract or other document central to argument). Moreover, the brief does not comply with Rule 9.5. See id. R. 9.5(a) (requiring party filing document to serve copy on all parties to proceeding.
Appellant is advised that as a pro se litigant, he must comply with all applicable procedural rules, and is held to the same standards as a licensed attorney. Paselk v. Rabun, 293 S.W.3d 600, 611 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2009, pet. denied); Sweed v. City of El Paso, 346 S.W.3d 679, 680 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2009, pet. denied). A pro se litigant is required to properly present his case on appeal. Sweed, 346 S.W.3d at 680-81. Accordingly, appellant must file a brief in compliance with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, including Rules 9.5, and 38.1.
Although substantial compliance with Rule 38.1 is generally sufficient, this court may order a party to amend, supplement, or redraw a brief if it flagrantly violates Rule 38.1. See id. R. 38.9(a). We conclude that the formal defects described above constitute flagrant violations of Rule 38.1.
Accordingly, we ORDER appellant's brief stricken and ORDER appellant to file an amended brief in this court on or before August 9, 2013. The amended brief must correct the violations listed above and fully comply with the applicable rules. See, e.g., id. R. 9.5, 38.1. If the amended brief does not comply with this order, we "may strike the brief, prohibit [appellant] from filing another, and proceed as if [appellant] had failed to file a brief." See id. R. 38.9(a); see also id. R. 38.8(a) (authorizing this court to dismiss appeal if appellant fails to timely file brief).
If appellant timely files a brief that complies with this order, appellee's brief will be due thirty days after appellant's brief is filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(b).
_______________
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 10th day of July, 2013.
_______________
Keith E. Hottle
Clerk of Court