Louis Rousset, Jr. v. Michael E. Rousset

Opinion

NUMBER 13-02-317-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

LOUIS ROUSSET, JR., Appellant,

v.

MICHAEL E. ROUSSET, ET AL., Appellees.

On appeal from the 357th District Court of Cameron County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Opinion by Justice Yañez

Appellant, Louis S. Rousset, Jr., has filed an amended pro-se brief. Appellant contends the trial court's judgment should be modified. The trial court found in his favor on quiet title and slander of title claims, but it did not award damages. Appellant asks this Court to modify the judgment by awarding damages. We affirm.

Appellant asserts he should have been awarded $66,000 for the lost sale of the property in question. However, appellant does not provide a "statement of facts" or support his contentions with "appropriate citations to authorities." Tex. R. App. P. 38.1. The only authority appellant offers is simply a case in which actual damages were awarded for a successful slander of title claim. See generally Tarrant Bank v. Miller, 833 S.W.2d 666 (Tex. App.-Eastland 1992, writ denied). The analysis in Miller does not support the award of damages in this case.

We overrule this issue.

We cannot consider any other issues for review because of the brief's numerous failings in both substance and form. Appellant's brief does not conform with many of the requirements of rule of appellate procedure 38.1. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1. Appellant was given the opportunity to amend, see Tex. R. App. P. 38.9, but still filed a substantially non-conforming brief. If any other issues are presented, they are waived. See Fed. Sign v. Tex. S. Univ., 951 S.W.2d 401, 410 (Tex. 1997) ("failure to brief an argument waives the claimed error").

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

LINDA REYNA YAÑEZ

Justice

Opinion delivered and filed this the

25^th day of September, 2003.