# Fourth Court of Appeals

San An tonio, Texas

May 12, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00194

- CV

Jose PEREZ , Jr.

, Appellant

v.

Salud CAZARES

, Appellee

From the 83rd Judicial District Court, Val Verde County, Texas

Trial Court No. 3287CCL Honorable Robert Cadena, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant prematurely filed h is brief on March 30, 2016, prior to filing his notice of appeal on April 5, 2016

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6 ( stating appellant must file brief within 30 days after later of the date the clerk’s record is filed or the date the reporter’s record is filed). The brief does not comply with Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See R. 38.1. Specifically, the brief violates Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38 .1 in that it does not

contain :

( 1 ) a statement of facts with record reference s ; or ( 2 ) an appendix.

See i d. R. 38.1(g) (requiring statement of facts with record reference s ) and 38.1(k) (requiring appendix with copy of ju dgment or other appealable order, any jury charge and verdict form, any findings of fact and conclusions of law, and text of applicable rules, regulations, ordinances, statutes, constitutional provisions, or other law on which argument is based, or any con tract or other document central to argument).

Although substantial compliance with Rule 38.1 is generally sufficient, this court may order a party to amend, supplement, or redraw a brief if it flagrantly violates Rule 38.1. See id. R. 38.9(a). We conclude that the formal defects described above constitute flagrant violations of

Rule 38.1.

Accordingly, we ORDER appellant’s brief stricken and ORDER appellant to file an

amended brief in this court on or before 30 days after the clerk ’s record or reporter’s record,whichever is later, is filed . The amended brief must correct the violations listed above and fully

comply with Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure

. See R. 38.1. If the amended brief does not comply with th is 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 appeal if appellant fails to timely fil e brief). Even if we do not strike the brief and prohibit appellant from filing another brief, we may find that any issues raised by appellant are waived due to inadequate briefing, and overrule those issues. See, e.g., Marin Real Estate Partners v. Vogt , 373 S.W.3d 57, 75 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2011, no pet.).

We recognize that appellant represents himself on appeal, i.e., he i s acting pro se. However, the law is clear that pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys

and must comply with all applicable rules of procedure, including the rules governing appellate

briefs. Valadez v. Avitia , 238 S.W.3d 843, 845 (Tex. App.

— El Paso 2007, no pet.). A pro se litigant is required to properly present his case on appeal just as he is r equired to properly present

his case to the trial court. Id. Accordingly, we will not apply different standards merely because an appeal is brought by a litigant acting without advice of counsel. Id.

If appellant timely files a brief that complies wit h 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).

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 12th day of May, 2016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court