COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 2-08-384-CV
LEQUITA SMITH AND ALL APPELLANTS
OCCUPANTS
V.
COMPASS BANK APPELLEE
------------
FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY
------------
MEMORANDUM OPINION 1
------------
On April 15, 2009, appellants, acting pro se, filed their brief with this
court. On April 16, 2009, we notified appellants that their brief was defective
in substance and form, specifically listing the ways in which their brief did not
comply with the rules of appellate procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 6.3, 38.1(c),
(d), (f)–(i). We also stated that failure to file an amended brief complying with
the rules on or before April 27, 2009 could result in our striking the
1
… See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
noncompliant brief, waiver of any nonconforming points, or dismissal of the
appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 38.9(a), 42.3. Appellants filed a motion
requesting three additional days to complete the brief, which this court granted,
but then appellants failed to file an amended brief.
Rule 38.9 provides that “substantial compliance” with the briefing rules
is required, subject to exceptions. Tex. R. App. P. 38.9. First, if the court
determines that the briefing rules have been flagrantly violated as to form, the
court may require a party to amend, supplement, or redraw a brief. Id. 38.9(a).
If a party files another brief that does not comply, the court may strike the
brief, prohibit the party from filing another, and proceed as if the party did not
file a brief. Id.
It is an appellant’s burden to discuss his or her assertions of error. See
Canton-Carter v. Baylor College of Med., 271 S.W.3d 928, 930 (Tex.
App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, pet. filed). An appellate court has no duty,
or even the right, to perform an independent review of the record and applicable
law to determine whether there was error. Id. Moreover, in addition to a
concise statement of all issues presented for review, an appellant’s brief must
also contain a clear and concise argument that includes appropriate citations to
legal authority and the appellate record. Id. at 931.
2
Here, although appellants’ brief is lengthy and extensive, no issues are
presented. Instead, in two locations of appellants’ brief, they state (1) “Please
let the Defendant prove when this property was re-posted for wrongful
foreclosure after the temporary restraining order was signed,” and (2) “Prove
where Defendant had permission from the County Court of Law to go to J P
Court and get an order for Forcible Entry when the hearing had not been
scheduled yet for trial.” Examining the entirety of appellants’ brief, however,
we are unable to discern any complaint about any alleged trial court error. And
appellants’ two statements labeled as “Arguments” fail to cite legal authority,
to cite to the appellate record, and to provide any substantive analysis.
Accordingly, because this court informed appellants of the substantial
defects in their brief and because appellants failed to file an amended brief
curing those defects, we strike appellants’ brief and dismiss the appeal for want
of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 38.9(a), 42.3(c); Newman v.
Clark, 113 S.W .3d 622, 623 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.); see also
Canton-Carter, 271 S.W.3d at 931 (determining that appellant’s issues on
appeal did not meet the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38
because they do not point out any error allegedly committed by the trial court
3
or even attack the merits of the trial court’s judgment, nor did appellant’s
arguments cite legal authority or provide substantive analysis).2
PER CURIAM
PANEL: WALKER, MCCOY, and MEIER, JJ.
DELIVERED: July 9, 2009
2
… Our dismissal of appellants’ appeal makes appellants’ pending motion
regarding the docketing statement moot.
4