# Fourth Court of Appeals
**San Antonio, Texas**

September 17, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00343

- CV

Richard SPEIR S

, Appellant

v.

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

, Appelle e

From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2009CI17924 Honorable Angelica Jimenez, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellan t, representing himself, filed a brief on September 7, 2018. Appellant’s brief recites alleged facts pertaining to his claim against the Union Pacific Railroad Company. His brief includes complaints about his trial lawyer, opposing counsel, and some fede ral government officials. The brief’s prayer states there is no probative evidence of Appellant’s negligence in causing his own injury, but the brief does not present anything for appellate review.

Appellant’s brief does not comply with Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.1. Specifically, the brief does not include the following:

• Identity of Parties and Counsel,

• Table of Contents,

• Index of Authorities,

• Statement of the Case,

• Issues Presented,

• Summary of the Argum ent,

• Argument,

• an Appendix (that complies with the Rules),

• Certificate of Compliance, or

• Proof of Service.

See id. R. 9.4, 9.5, 38.1. The brief has these additional defects.• No part of the brief contains any citations to the record. Contra id. R. 38.1( g) (“The statement [of facts] must be supported by record references.”); id. R. 38.1(i) (“The brief must contain .

. . appropriate citations .

. . to the record.”).

• The portions of the brief that may be construed as a statement of facts recite alleged fa cts and complaints, but the brief does not state how the trial court erred or present any legal arguments, with appropriate citations to authorities and the record, to present any legal basis for this court to reverse the trial court’s judgment. Contra id

.

• The brief does not recite the standard of review; it does not contain an index of authorities, and it contains no citations to rules or statutes, or any references to case law. Contra id. (requiring “appropriate citations to authorities”).

This cour t may order a party to amend, supplement, or redraw a brief if it flagrantly
violates Rule 38. See id. R. 38.9(a). We conclude that the defects described above constitute flagrant violations of Rule 38.

Therefore, we STRIKE Appellant’s brief and ORDER A ppellant Richard Speirs to file an
amended brief within TEN DAYS of the date of this order. The amended brief must correct all of the violations listed above and fully comply with the applicable rules. See, e.g.

, id. R. 9.4, 9.5, 38.1. If the amended br ief 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 an appeal if an appellant fails to timely file a 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 T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(b).

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 17th day of September, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court