From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tadesse v. Akhtarkhavari

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Jan 20, 2017
No. 05-15-01040-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 20, 2017)

Opinion

No. 05-15-01040-CV

01-20-2017

AGERE TADESSE, Appellant v. RIAZ AKHTARKHAVARI, Appellee


On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. CC-15-03955-B

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang, Brown, and Whitehill
Opinion by Justice Whitehill

Appellant is pro se before this Court, and appears to complain about a judgment entered in his landlord's favor.

We liberally construe pro se pleadings and briefs. Washington v. Bank of N.Y., 362 S.W.3d 853, 854 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, no pet.). However, we hold pro se litigants to the same standards as licensed attorneys and require them to comply with applicable laws and rules of procedure. Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181, 184-85 (Tex. 1978); Strange v. Continental Cas. Co., 126 S.W.3d 676, 678 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, pet. denied).

The rules of appellate procedure require a party's brief to contain a "clear and concise argument" for the party's contentions and "appropriate citations to authorities and to the record." TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(i). A party who fails to support his or her contentions with authority or citations to the record when appropriate forfeits the issue due to inadequate briefing. See Morrill v. Cisek, 226 S.W.3d 545, 548-49 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.) (holding party waived issues by failing to cite to record and authority); Lueg v. Lueg, 976 S.W.2d 308, 310 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1998, pet. denied) (same). We are not required to sort through the record to find facts to support appellant's position. Otherwise, our independent review of the record would transform the court from a neutral adjudicator to an advocate. Valdez v. Avita, 238 S.W.3d 843, 845 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2007, no pet.).

Without argument concerning how the county court erred, citation to the record, or citation to authority, any error that may have occurred in the county court is forfeited. See Fredonia State Bank v. General Am. Life Ins. Co., 881 S.W.2d 279, 284 (Tex. 1994).

Under these circumstances, we have no choice but to affirm the county court's judgment.

/Bill Whitehill/

BILL WHITEHILL

JUSTICE 151040F.P05

JUDGMENT

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. CC-15-03955-B.
Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. Justices Lang and Brown participating.

In accordance with this Court's opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

It is ORDERED that each party bear its own costs of this appeal. Judgment entered January 20, 2017.


Summaries of

Tadesse v. Akhtarkhavari

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Jan 20, 2017
No. 05-15-01040-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 20, 2017)
Case details for

Tadesse v. Akhtarkhavari

Case Details

Full title:AGERE TADESSE, Appellant v. RIAZ AKHTARKHAVARI, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: Jan 20, 2017

Citations

No. 05-15-01040-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 20, 2017)