Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Devilbiss v. Burch

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio

June 15, 2017

John DEVILBISS, Appellant
v.
Majorie BURCH, Appellee

         From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2016CV04843 Honorable Tommy Stolhandske, Judge Presiding

          ORDER

          Marialyn Barnard, Justice.

         Appellant filed his brief on June 12, 2017. The brief does not comply with Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1. Specifically, the brief violates Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1 in that it does not contain:

(1)a table of contents;
(2)an index of authorities;
(3)a proper statement of the case;
(4) a proper statement of the issues presented, setting out what errors were allegedly committed by the trial court;
(5)a statement of facts with record references;
(6)a proper summary of the argument;
(7)proper legal argument with appropriate citation to authorities and the appellate record; or
(8)a proper appendix.

See id. R. 38.1(b) (requiring table of contents), 38.1(c) (requiring index of authorities), 38.1(d) (requiring statement of case supported by record references that does not exceed one-half page); 38.1(f) (requiring concise statement of issues presented), 38.1(g) (requiring statement of facts with record reference), 38.1(h) (requiring succinct, clear, and accurate summary of arguments made in body of brief), 38.1(i) (requiring argument with appropriate citation to authority and record), and 38.1(k) (requiring appendix with copy of judgment 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 contract 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.

         We note that in his brief, appellant makes several "requests." In actuality, these motions in which appellant is requesting relief from this court. Appellant is advised that such requests should be made in motion form and in documents separate from the appellate brief. See Tex.R.App.P. 10.1(a) (stating that party must apply by motion for order ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.