David R. Hutchings v. Llano County

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 20, 2006
• Docket: 13-05-00439-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

                             NUMBER 13-05-00439-CV

                         COURT OF APPEALS

                     THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                         CORPUS CHRISTI B EDINBURG

DAVID ROY HUTCHINGS,                                                               Appellant,

                                                             v.

LLANO COUNTY, LLANO INDEPENDENT

SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND LLANO COUNTY

EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT NO. 3,                                  Appellees.

      On appeal from the 33rd District Court of Llano County, Texas.

                       MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Before Justices Hinojosa, Rodriguez, and Garza

                         Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa

Appellant, David Roy Hutchings, appeals from the trial court=s judgment in favor of appellees, Llano County, Llano Independent School District, and Llano County Emergency Services District No. 3, for delinquent taxes in the amount of $4,324.52.  We affirm.

Appellant=s brief fails to substantially comply with the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1.  Appellant=s brief fails to concisely describe the facts relevant to his appeal.  Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(f).  The statement of facts consists of broad assertions of legal issues and arguments, with no specific references to the record.  This Court is only able to ascertain the nature of the case below by reviewing the trial court=s judgment.

Further, although appellant ostensibly enumerates twelve issues on appeal, he does not provide clear and concise arguments to support his expansive contentions.  See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(h).  The main argument section of appellant=s brief is comprised of a lengthy, often incomprehensible, diatribe on violations of rights; however, none of the discussion clearly correlates to a specific issue.  Although appellant makes broad references to the Constitutions of both the State of Texas and the United States, he fails to specifically cite any authority to support or explain his broad contentions.  See id.  Moreover, while he generally invites us to review the record, he does not refer us to any particular portion of the record.  See id.

We conclude that appellant has failed to adequately brief anything for our review.  All of appellant=s issues are overruled.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

FEDERICO G. HINOJOSA

Justice

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 20th day of July, 2006.