NUMBER 13-13-00498-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
RITO SALAS AND
ERICA SOLIZ, Appellants,
v.
MARIA MORENO, Appellee.
____________________________________________________________
On appeal from County Court at Law
of Bee County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Longoria
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
The appellants’ brief in the above cause was due on October 21, 2013. On
November 18, 2013, appellants filed a one page brief. The brief failed generally to
comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1.
On December 12, 2013, and January 16, 2014, the Clerk of the Court notified
appellants that the brief failed generally to comply with Rules 9.4 and 38.1 as required by
Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Appellants were directed to file an amended brief
in compliance with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure within ten days of the date of
the letter, and notified that if the Court received another brief that did not comply, the
Court may strike the brief, prohibit appellants from filing another, and proceed as if
appellants had failed to file a brief, under which circumstances the Court may affirm the
judgment or dismiss the appeal. See id. 38.9(a), 42.3(b),(c). Appellants failed to
respond to the Court’s notice.
Pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys, and they
must therefore comply with all applicable rules of procedure. Mansfield State Bank v.
Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181, 184–85 (Tex. 1978). If the appellate court determines that the
briefing rules have been flagrantly violated, it may require a brief to be amended,
supplemented, or redrawn. TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a). If the appellant does not file
another brief that complies with the rules of appellate procedure, the appellate court may
strike the brief, prohibit the party from filing another, and proceed as if the party had failed
to file a brief. Id. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a), where an
appellant has failed to file a brief, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of
prosecution.
Accordingly, we strike appellants’ non-conforming brief and order the appeal
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 38.9(a),
42.3(b)(c).
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
13th day of March, 2014.
2