David Duran v. Hardy Burke
This text of David Duran v. Hardy Burke (David Duran v. Hardy Burke) 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.
Opinion
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-18-00176-CV ___________________________
DAVID DURAN, Appellant
V.
HARDY BURKE, Appellee
On Appeal from the 211th District Court Denton County, Texas Trial Court No. 17-7583-211
Before Kerr, Pittman, and Birdwell, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT
Appellant David Duran’s brief was originally due on August 20, 2018. Before
his brief was due, Duran filed a “Motion to File Appellant[’s] Brief o[n] Grounds of
Errors,” which this court construed as a motion for extension of time to file his brief.
We granted Duran’s motion and ordered him to file his brief by September 19, 2018.
On September 11, 2018, Duran filed a document that we construed as a brief.
This brief lists eight grounds for Duran’s appeal without further explanation and
lacks, among other things, a statement of facts, argument, and citation to authorities.
The next day, we notified Duran of the deficiencies in his brief, specifically listing the
ways in which his brief does not comply with the rules of appellate procedure. See
Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(i), 38.1(a)–(d), (g)–(i), (k). We directed Duran to file an amended,
rule-compliant brief by September 24, 2018. See Tex. R. App. P. 9, 38; 2nd Tex. App.
(Fort Worth) Loc. R. 1. We warned him that his failure to do so could result in a
waiver of noncompliant points or our striking his noncompliant brief and dismissing
the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 38.9(a), 42.3.
In response, Duran filed a “Motion to File Appellant’s Brief of Facts,” which
we construed as his attempt to file a brief. Like Duran’s original brief, this brief was
also noncompliant. It lists several facts without record references, lacks argument and
citation to authorities, and does not satisfy rule 38.1’s other formal requirements. See
Tex. R. App. P. 38.1. Accordingly, we denied Duran’s “Motion to File Appellant’s
Brief of Facts” and ordered him to file a corrected brief by October 11, 2018. We 2 warned Duran again that his failure to do so could result in a waiver of noncompliant
points or our striking his noncompliant briefs and dismissing the appeal. See Tex. R.
App. P. 38.8(a), 38.9(a), 42.3. We have received no response from Duran.
Because Duran has failed to file an amended, rule-compliant brief even after we
have afforded him two opportunities to do so, we strike Duran’s noncompliant briefs
and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 38.9(a), 42.3(b)–(c), 43.2(f).
/s/ Elizabeth Kerr Elizabeth Kerr Justice
Delivered: November 29, 2018
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
David Duran v. Hardy Burke, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-duran-v-hardy-burke-texapp-2018.