Shaune E. Gross v. Nikki Demby, San Antonio Independent School District Board of Trustees and Toni Thompson ( 2011 )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-10-00789-CV
Shaune E. GROSS,
Appellant
v.
Nikki DEMBY, San Antonio Independent School District Board of Trustees and Toni
Thompson,
Appellees
From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2010-CI-05446
Honorable Peter Sakai, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: April 13, 2011
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION
In this case, appellant has filed two defective briefs. Appellant’s original brief did not
identify the parties and counsel; and did not contain a table of contents, index of authorities,
statement of the case, issues presented, a statement of facts, a summary of the argument, or any
argument. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. Accordingly, on February 28, 2011, this court issued an
order pointing out the deficiencies and ordering appellant to file an amended brief that complied
with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1. Appellant filed an amended brief that is also
04-10-00789-CV
defective. Appellant’s amended brief contains a statement of facts that is not supported by
record references. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(g). Nor does the amended brief contain “a clear and
concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authority and to the
record. Id. 38.1(i).
Substantial compliance with Rule 38 is sufficient. TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9. However, if
Rule 38 has been flagrantly violated, this court may require a brief to be amended, supplemented,
or redrawn. Id. 38.9(a). If another noncomplying brief is filed, this court may strike the brief,
prohibit the party from filing another, and proceed as if the party had failed to file a brief. Id.
Pro se litigants, such as appellant, “are not exempt from the rules of procedure.” Wheeler v.
Green, 157 S.W.3d 439, 444 (Tex. 2005). Because appellant’s amended brief fails to
substantially comply with Rule 38, we will proceed as if appellant failed to file a brief. TEX. R.
APP. P. 38.9(a).
If an appellant fails to timely file a brief, this court may dismiss the appeal for want of
prosecution. TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1). Accordingly, on our own motion, we DISMISS this
appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 38.9(a), 42.3(b).
PER CURIAM
-2-