Affirm and Opinion Filed July 12, 2024 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-23-00570-CV 

JASON GIBSON AND ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS, Appellant 

V. 

GOEL VENTURES THREE LLC, Appellee 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 7 

Collin County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 007-00748-2023 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Molberg, Pedersen, III, and Goldstein 

Opinion by Justice Molberg 

Appellant Jason Gibson appeals from a judgment for appellee Goal Ventures 

Three, LLC in a forcible detainer action. Appellant’s brief was due October 11, 

2023, but was not filed. Appellee filed a brief on October 13, 2023, arguing the 

trial court properly granted summary judgment and seeking damages under rule of 

appellate procedure 45. 

Rule 45 provides: 

If the court of appeals determines that an appeal is frivolous, it may—

on motion of any party or on its own initiative, after notice and a 

reasonable opportunity for response—award each prevailing party just 

damages. In determining whether to award damages, the court must 
 –2– 

not consider any matter that does not appear in the record, briefs, or 

other papers filed in the court of appeals. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 45. As we have stated previously: 

“An appeal is frivolous if, at the time asserted, the advocate had no 

reasonable grounds to believe judgment would be reversed or when an 

appeal is pursued in bad faith.” See D Design Holdings, L.P. v. MMP 

Corp., 339 S.W.3d 195, 205 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011, no pet.). “The 

decision to grant appellate sanctions is a matter of discretion that an 

appellate court exercises with prudence and caution and only after 

careful deliberation.” Owen v. Jim Allee Imports, Inc., 380 S.W.3d 

276, 290 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, no pet.). “Although imposing 

sanctions is within our discretion, we will do so only in circumstances 

that are truly egregious.” Id. “[A]n issue’s lack of merit does not 

necessarily equate to bad faith.” Byrd v. Hutton, No. 05-19-01191-

CV, 2020 WL 4013150, at *6 (Tex. App.—Dallas July 16, 2020, pet. 

denied) (mem. op.). 

Estate of Webb, No. 05-22-00673-CV, 2023 WL 7144639, at *6 (Tex. App.—

Dallas Oct. 31, 2023, no pet.) (mem. op. on reh’g). 

We decline to award sanctions under rule 45. See Sun Holdings, Inc. v. 

Hudson Energy Servs., LLC, No. 05-23-00751-CV, 2024 WL 358113, at *1 (Tex. 

App.—Dallas Jan. 31, 2024, no pet.) (mem. op.) (declining to award appellee rule 

45 damages when appellant failed to file brief). 

Finally, as stated above, while appellee filed a brief in this cause, appellant 

failed to do so. If an appellant fails to timely file a brief in a civil case, “if an 

appellee’s brief is filed, the court may regard that brief as correctly presenting the 

case and may affirm the trial court’s judgment upon that brief without examining 

the record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(3). Accordingly, we regard appellee’s brief as 
 –3– 

correctly presenting the case and affirm the trial court’s judgment. See id.; HSBC 

Bank USA, N.A. v. Watson, 377 S.W.3d 766, 769 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, pet. 

dism’d) (affirming judgment under rule 38.8(a)(3) as to appellant that failed to file 

brief); In re L.N.E., No. 05-07-01712-CV, 2009 WL 280472, at *3 (Tex. App.—

Dallas Feb. 6, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.) (same). 

230570F.P05 

 

/Ken Molberg/

KEN MOLBERG 

JUSTICE 
 –4– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

JASON GIBSON AND ALL OTHER 

OCCUPANTS, Appellant 

No. 05-23-00570-CV V. 

GOEL VENTURES THREE LLC, 

Appellee 

 On Appeal from the County Court at 

Law No. 7, Collin County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 007-00748-

2023. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg. 

Justices Pedersen, III and Goldstein 

participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial 

court is AFFIRMED. 

 It is ORDERED that appellee GOEL VENTURES THREE LLC recover its 

costs of this appeal from appellant JASON GIBSON AND ALL OTHER 

OCCUPANTS. 

Judgment entered July 12, 2024