Jasmond Kemp Dba World Wide Automotive and Paint v. Santander Consumer USA Inc. ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                             Fourth Court of Appeals
    San Antonio, Texas
    March 27, 2018
    No. 04-17-00622-CV
    Jasmond KEMP dba World Wide Automotive and Paint,
    Appellants
    v.
    SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.,
    Appellees
    From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 2016-CI-08203
    Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding
    ORDER
    On March 8, 2018, after the brief deadline passed and no brief or motion for extension of
    time to file a brief was filed, we ordered Appellant Jasmine Kemp to file his appellant’s brief not
    later than March 19, 2018. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a).
    On the ordered due date, Appellant, representing himself, filed a ten-page “Court Brief.”
    The first page consists of the style, a one-sentence request for oral argument, and two paragraphs
    of text. The two paragraphs assert facts that purport to show that Appellee defaulted on a
    previous settlement agreement. The remaining nine pages are copies of the first page of nine
    separate orders for writ of sequestration—each writ addressing a separate vehicle.
    Appellant’s 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 does not include the following:
    •   Identity of Parties and Counsel,
    •   Table of Contents,
    •   Index of Authorities,
    •   Statement of the Case,
    •   Issues Presented,
    •   Statement of Facts,
    •   Summary of the Argument,
    •   Argument,
    •   Prayer, or
    •   Appendix (that complies with the Rules).
    See 
    id. The brief
    has these additional defects.
    •   No part of the brief contains any citations to the record. Contra 
    id. R. 38.1(g)
    (“The
    statement [of facts] must be supported by record references.”); 
    id. R. 38.1(i)
    (“The
    brief must contain . . . appropriate citations . . . to the record.”).
    •   The two paragraphs of the brief that could be construed as a statement of facts recite
    alleged facts and complaints, but the brief does not state how the trial court erred and
    on what legal basis this court should reverse the trial court’s judgment. Contra 
    id. (“The brief
    must contain a clear and concise argument for the contentions made
    . . . .”).
    •   The brief does not recite the standard of review; it does not contain an index of
    authorities, and it contains no citations to rules or statutes, or any references to case
    law. Contra 
    id. (requiring “appropriate
    citations to authorities”).
    •   With respect to the attached first pages of the nine writ of sequestration orders, “[t]he
    attachment of documents as exhibits or appendices to briefs is not formal inclusion in
    the record on appeal and, therefore, the documents cannot be considered.” Bencon
    Mgmt. & Gen. Contracting, Inc. v. Boyer, Inc., 
    178 S.W.3d 198
    , 210 (Tex. App.—
    Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet.); accord Mauldin v. Clements, 
    428 S.W.3d 247
    ,
    262 n.3 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, no pet.) (noting that “documents
    attached to briefs are not part of the record of the case and cannot be considered”).
    This court may order a party to amend, supplement, or redraw a brief if it flagrantly
    violates Rule 38. See 
    id. R. 38.9(a).
    We conclude that the defects described above constitute
    flagrant violations of Rule 38.
    Therefore, we STRIKE Appellant’s brief and ORDER Appellant Jasmine Kemp to file an
    amended brief within TEN DAYS of the date of this order. The amended brief must correct
    all of the violations listed above and fully comply with the applicable rules. See, e.g., 
    id. R. 9.4,
    9.5, 38.1. If the amended brief does not comply with this order, we “may strike the brief,
    prohibit [Appellant] from filing another, and proceed as if [Appellant] had failed to file a brief.”
    See 
    id. R. 38.9(a);
    see also 
    id. R. 38.8(a)
    (authorizing this court to dismiss an appeal if an
    appellant fails to timely file a brief).
    If Appellant timely files a brief that complies with this order, Appellee’s brief will be due
    thirty days after Appellant’s brief is filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(b).
    _________________________________
    Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
    court on this 27th day of March, 2018.
    ___________________________________
    KEITH E. HOTTLE,
    Clerk of Court
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-17-00622-CV

Filed Date: 3/27/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/4/2018