Dean Sivorakoune v. Chackkraphan Chamratban ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued June 8, 2023
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    ————————————
    NO. 01-21-00718-CV
    ———————————
    DEAN SIVORAKOUNE, Appellant
    V.
    CHACKKRAPHAN CHAMRATBAN, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 246th District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Case No. 2021-36750
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant Dean Sivorakoune appeals from a final divorce decree rendered
    by default dissolving his marriage to appellee, Chackkraphan Chamratban.
    Sivorakoune filed an appellant’s brief that failed to comply with the mandatory
    briefing provisions in Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.1 The
    one-page, single-spaced brief included no citation to the record or any legal
    authority and failed to include the identity of parties and counsel, a table of
    contents, an index of authorities, a statement of the case, the issues presented, a
    summary of the arguments, or an appendix containing a copy of the trial court’s
    judgment from which relief was sought. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(a), (b), (c), (d),
    (f), (h), (i), (k).
    We therefore struck Sivorakoune’s brief and ordered him to file an amended
    brief that complies with Rule 38.1, no later than twenty days from the date of the
    order.2 We also informed Sivorakoune that if he failed to comply with the Court’s
    order, his appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution or failure to comply
    with the requirements of the rules of appellate procedure or an order of this Court.3
    1
    See M&E Endeavors LLC v. Air Voice Wireless LLC, Nos. 01-18-00852-CV, 01-
    19-00180-CV, 
    2020 WL 5047902
    , at *7 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 27,
    2020, no pet.) (mem. op.) (explaining that appellate briefing requirements are
    mandatory).
    2
    See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a) (“If the court determines that this rule has been
    flagrantly violated, it may require a brief to be amended, supplemented, or
    redrawn.”); see also id. 44.3 (“A court of appeals must not affirm or reverse a
    judgment or dismiss an appeal for formal defects or irregularities in appellate
    procedure without allowing a reasonable time to correct or amend the defects or
    irregularities.”).
    3
    See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a) (stating when appellant fails to file brief, court of
    appeals may dismiss appeal for want of prosecution or, if appellee has filed brief,
    may regard that brief as correctly presenting issues and affirm trial court’s
    judgment without examining record); id. 42.3(b), (c) (stating appellate court may
    2
    Sivorakoune has failed to file an amended brief, as directed by the Court.
    We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Id. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b),
    43.2(f).
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Justices Landau, Countiss, and Guerra.
    dismiss appeal if it is subject to dismissal for want of prosecution or because
    appellant has failed to comply with requirements of appellate rules or court order).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-21-00718-CV

Filed Date: 6/8/2023

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/12/2023