Leskel Nichols v. Downtown Kwik Lube ( 2020 )

DISMISSED and Opinion Filed April 15, 2020
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-19-00863-CV
LESKEL NICHOLS, Appellant
V.
DOWNTOWN KWIK LUBE, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-00165-D
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Whitehill, and Justice Molberg
Opinion by Chief Justice Burns
Pro se appellant Leskel Nichols appeals the trial court’s judgment in his favor.
When appellant filed his brief on January 2, 2020, we determined it was deficient.
By letter dated January 10, 2020, we notified appellant that his brief failed to comply
with the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 38.1. We provided appellant an opportunity to file an amended brief that complied
with rule 38.1’s requirements within ten days and cautioned him that failure to
comply might result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. See id.
38.8(a)(1); 42.3(b), (c). By order dated January 17, 2020, we granted appellant an
extension to February 18, 2020. We again cautioned that failure to comply might
result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. Appellant did not file an
amended brief.
Although civil litigants may represent themselves at trial and on appeal, pro
se litigants must adhere to our rules of evidence and procedure, including the
appellate rules of procedure. Bolling v. Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist., 315
S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010, no pet.). Our appellate rules have
specific requirements for briefing. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38. Among other
requirements, the rules require appellants to state concisely their complaints; provide
understandable, succinct, and clear argument showing why their complaints are
meritorious in fact and in law; cite and apply applicable law; and provide appropriate
references to the record. See id. 38.1(f–i); Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895. If an appellant
fails to provide adequate briefing, we may dismiss the appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3;
Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895–96.
Appellant failed to file a brief that complies with our briefing rules, despite
being notified of his brief’s deficiencies and being given multiple opportunities to
amend. Appellant’s brief fails to provide a concise statement of facts supported by
record references or argument with appropriate citations to the record and legal
authorities. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(g), (i). Without adequate briefing, especially
the lack of support by reference to the record and authorities, appellant is not entitled
to judicial review. See id.; Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895–96.
–2–
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c); Bolling, 315
S.W.3d at 895–96.
/Robert D.Burns, III/
ROBERT D. BURNS, III
CHIEF JUSTICE
190863F.P05
–3–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
LESKEL NICHOLS, Appellant On Appeal from the County Court at
Law No. 4, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-19-00863-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-00165-
D.
DOWNTOWN KWIK LUBE, Opinion delivered by Chief Justice
Appellee Burns. Justices Whitehill and
Molberg participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is
DISMISSED.
It is ORDERED that appellee DOWNTOWN KWIK LUBE recover its costs
of this appeal, if any, from appellant LESKEL NICHOLS.
Judgment entered April 15, 2020
–4–