Kim Carlene Jennings v. Segal Properties

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 15, 2025
• Docket: 03-25-00060-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-25-00060-CV

Kim Carlene Jennings, Appellant

v.

Segal Properties, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF BELL COUNTY NO. 24CCV01296, THE HONORABLE PAUL A. MOTZ, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Kim Jennings, appearing pro se, appeals from the trial court’s take-nothing

judgment in her suit against her former landlord, Segal Properties. However, even construed

liberally, Jennings’ appeal is inadequately briefed. See Henderson v. Armbrust & Brown, PLLC,

No. 03-24-00509-CV, 2025 WL 492506, at *3 (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 14, 2025, no pet.)

(mem. op.). While Jennings generally complains about a bedbug infestation at her former

residence, she has failed to:

• assign reversible error to any part of the trial court’s judgment or otherwise present a legally cognizable issue for our review, see Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(f) (requiring brief to “state concisely all issues or points presented for review”);

• provide substantive arguments, cite authority, or otherwise advance a legally cognizable theory demonstrating why or how the trial court erred, see Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(i) (requiring brief to “contain a clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities”); or • pray for any legally cognizable form of relief, see Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(j) (requiring brief to “contain a short conclusion that clearly states the nature of the relief sought”).

In other words, Jennings has failed to say what the trial court did wrong, why it

was wrong, and how we can fix it. Holding Jennings to the same standard as parties represented

by counsel, we hold she has waived any issues that she may have by inadequate briefing.

Hughes v. Armadillo Props., No. 03-15-00698-CV, 2016 WL 5349380, at *2 (Tex. App.—

Austin Sept. 20, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.). Because Jennings’ brief presents nothing for our

review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

__________________________________________ Maggie Ellis, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly and Ellis

Affirmed

Filed: August 15, 2025