Jus Payton v. Angela Crouch ( 2019 )


Menu:
  • AFFIRMED and Opinion Filed January 23, 2019
    S    In The
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    No. 05-17-01252-CV
    JUSTIN PAYTON, Appellant
    V.
    ANGELA CROUCH, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 303rd Judicial District Court
    Dallas County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. DF-16-27369
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before Justices Bridges, Brown, and Whitehill
    Opinion by Justice Whitehill
    On October 3, 2017, the trial court granted Angela Crouch–Payton’s petition for divorce from
    Justin Payton. Justin Payton, pro se, appeals the trial court’s judgment.
    Initially, we note that a pro se litigant is held to the same standards as licensed attorneys and
    must comply with applicable laws and rules of procedure. Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 
    573 S.W.2d 181
    , 184–85 (Tex.1978). On appeal, as at trial, the pro se appellant must properly present
    its case. Id.; Strange v. Continental Cas. Co., 
    126 S.W.3d 676
    , 678 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, pet.
    denied).
    The rules of appellate procedure require appellant's brief to contain “a clear and concise
    argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities and to the record.”
    TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(h). An issue on appeal unsupported by argument or citation to any legal
    authority presents nothing for the court to review. Birnbaum v. Law Offices of G. David Westfall,
    
    120 S.W.3d 470
    , 477 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, pet. denied). Similarly, we cannot speculate as to
    the substance of the specific issues appellant claims we must address. 
    Strange, 126 S.W.3d at 678
    .
    An appellate court has no duty to perform an independent review of the record and applicable law
    to determine whether the error complained of occurred. 
    Id. We are
    faced with a difficult task in attempting to address this pro se appellant’s appeal.
    The appellant’s brief and amended brief are handwritten notes asking for our help. Appellant
    provides no issues, discussion, or argument and cites neither legal authorities, nor the record. We
    cannot draft and articulate what we think appellant meant to raise on appeal. Accordingly, we
    resolve appellant’s issue(s) against him. The trial court’s judgment is affirmed.
    /Bill Whitehill/
    BILL WHITEHILL
    JUSTICE
    171252F.P05
    –2–
    S
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    JUDGMENT
    JUSTIN PAYTON, Appellant                            On Appeal from the 303rd Judicial District
    Court, Dallas County, Texas
    No. 05-17-01252-CV          V.                      Trial Court Cause No. DF-16-27369.
    Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill.
    ANGELA CROUCH, Appellee                             Justices Bridges and Brown participating.
    In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is
    AFFIRMED.
    It is ORDERED that each party bear its own costs of this appeal.
    Judgment entered January 23, 2019.
    –3–
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-17-01252-CV

Filed Date: 1/23/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021