Datril Boston v. Bryce Daniel, Inc. D/B/A Fast & Free Real Estate

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 19, 2015
Docket14-14-00124-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Datril Boston v. Bryce Daniel, Inc. D/B/A Fast & Free Real Estate (Datril Boston v. Bryce Daniel, Inc. D/B/A Fast & Free Real Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Datril Boston v. Bryce Daniel, Inc. D/B/A Fast & Free Real Estate, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Order filed February 19, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-14-00124-CV ____________

DATRIL BOSTON, Appellant

V.

BRYCE DANIEL, INC. D/B/A FAST & FREE REAL ESTATE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 269th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2008-74789

ORDER

Appellant’s brief was filed on February 4, 2015. The court has determined that appellant has not properly presented this cause in his brief. First, appellant filed a combined appellant’s brief and appellee’s brief, in an attempt to respond to appellant’s brief in a related appeal docketed under case number 14-14-00764-CV, styled Edward J. Sherman and Edward J. Sherman Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Find It Apartment Locators v. Datril Boston and Apartment Express, LLC d/b/a Mr. Day Rents. These appeals have not been consolidated. Because there are different parties in the two appeals, consolidation will not be ordered unless good cause is shown.

Moreover, appellant failed to substantially comply with Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure governing the required contents of appellant’s brief. In particular, appellant has failed to state his issues concisely and provide a clear and concise argument for each contention made, with appropriate citations to the record and to authority. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1 (f), (i).

Litigants who appear without counsel must comply with the applicable procedural rules and are held to the same standards that apply to licensed attorneys. See Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181, 185 (Tex. 1978); Steffan v. Steffan, 29 S.W.3d 627, 631 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. denied).

Pursuant to Rule 38.9(b), the court orders appellant to file an amended appellant’s brief in this case complying with the rules of appellate procedure on or before March 16, 2015. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.9(b). If appellant fails to file an amended brief in compliance with the appellate rules as ordered herein, the appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and McCally.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Steffan v. Steffan
29 S.W.3d 627 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000)
Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn
573 S.W.2d 181 (Texas Supreme Court, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Datril Boston v. Bryce Daniel, Inc. D/B/A Fast & Free Real Estate, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/datril-boston-v-bryce-daniel-inc-dba-fast-free-rea-texapp-2015.