Court Opinion

ID: 9400031
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-07 08:09:19.096254+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:41.711509
License: Public Domain

In the
              Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

                  No. 06-23-00006-CV

            BRITNEY JOHNSON, Appellant

                            V.

        THE VIEW AT LAKESIDE LP, Appellee

      On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2
                  Denton County, Texas
           Trial Court No. CV-2022-03855-JP

      Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
       Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef
                                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

        Appellant, Britney Johnson, filed a timely pro se notice of appeal on December 12,

2022.1 The clerk’s record was filed on January 12, 2023. The reporter’s record was filed on

February 28, 2023. The original deadline for Johnson’s appellate brief was March 30, 2023.

When Johnson failed to meet the original deadline for filing her brief, we advised her that her

brief was late and extended the briefing deadline until May 1, 2023.

        On May 1, 2023, we received a document that purported to be Johnson’s appellate brief.

On that same date, we sent Johnson a letter explaining that, for numerous reasons, the document

we received was inadequate to serve as a brief because it did not meet the requirements of Rule

38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. In our letter, we

provided Johnson with a detailed explanation of why the document she provided to this Court

failed to comply with Rule 38.1. We informed Johnson that, if she did not file a brief that

complied with Rule 38.1 by May 23, 2023, this Court could dismiss the appeal. Johnson did not

file a brief meeting the requirements of Rule 38.1 and did not file a motion for further extension

of time in which to file such a brief. As a result, Johnson’s appeal is ripe for dismissal.2

        Pursuant to Rules 38.8 and 42.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we dismiss

this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8, 42.3; see also Running v. City of

1
 Originally appealed to the Second Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme
Court pursuant to Section 73.001 of the Texas Government Code. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001. We are
unaware of any conflict between precedent of the Second Court of Appeals and that of this Court on any relevant
issue. See TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3.

2
 Having provided Johnson with ample opportunity to file a proper brief in this matter, we are disinclined to provide
her with further direction on how to file a brief that complies with Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure. Moreover, we do not have the opposing party’s brief and, therefore, cannot affirm on that brief without
examining the record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(3).
                                                         2
Athens, No. 12-18-00047-CV, 2018 WL 2326775, at *1 (Tex. App.—Tyler, May 23, 2018, no

pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op.).

                                       Charles van Cleef
                                       Justice

Date Submitted:       June 5, 2023
Date Decided:         June 6, 2023

                                         3