Court Opinion

ID: 9952560
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-20 07:17:13.984996+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:41:10.631205
License: Public Domain

Dismissed and Opinion Filed March 18, 2024

                                        In The
                              Court of Appeals
                       Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                No. 05-23-01213-CV

                       IN THE INTEREST OF S.A., A CHILD

                On Appeal from the 301st Judicial District Court
                             Dallas County, Texas
                     Trial Court Cause No. DF-21-14384

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
           Before Justices Molberg, Pedersen, III, and Justice Goldstein
                         Opinion by Justice Pedersen, III
      Before the Court is appellee’s motion to dismiss this appeal. In the motion,

appellee asks the Court to dismiss the appeal because, despite being given the

opportunity to cure the briefing deficiencies identified in the Court’s February 8,

2024 letter, appellant’s corrected brief still fails to satisfy the requirements of Texas

Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1. We agree with appellee, grant her motion, and

dismiss this appeal.

      After appellant filed his brief, we sent him a letter explaining that, for

numerous reasons, it did not meet the requirements of rule 38.1 of the rules of

appellate procedure. In that letter, we provided appellant with a detailed explanation
of why the document he provided to the Court failed to comply with rule 38.1. We

informed appellant that if he did not file a brief that complied with rule 38.1 within

ten days, his appeal was subject to dismissal. While appellant did file another brief,

it, like the first, was inadequate to serve as a brief under the requirements of rule

38.1. In particular, among other things, appellant’s amended brief fails to include a

table of contents, a table of authorities, a statement of the case, the issues presented,

a statement of facts supported record cites, or an argument for the contentions made

with appropriate citations to authorities and to the record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1.

      Even liberally construing appellant’s brief, we conclude it is wholly

inadequate to present any questions for appellate review and is in flagrant violation

of rule 38.1. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1; Bolling v. Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist.,

315 S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. App—Dallas 2010, no pet.). Under these circumstances,

we strike appellee’s amended brief, grant appellee’s motion, and dismiss this appeal.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a); 42.3(b)(c).

                                             /Bill Pedersen, III/
231213f.p05                                  BILL PEDERSEN, III
                                             JUSTICE

                                           –2–
                            Court of Appeals
                     Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                 JUDGMENT

IN THE INTEREST OF S.A., A                   On Appeal from the 301st Judicial
CHILD                                        District Court, Dallas County, Texas
                                             Trial Court Cause No. DF-21-14384.
No. 05-23-01213-CV                           Opinion delivered by Justice
                                             Pedersen, III. Justices Molberg and
                                             Goldstein participating.

    In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is
DISMISSED.

Judgment entered this 18th day of March, 2024.

                                       –3–