Roberto Rodriguez Escamilla v. Ricardo Cadena
This text of Roberto Rodriguez Escamilla v. Ricardo Cadena (Roberto Rodriguez Escamilla v. Ricardo Cadena) 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
NUMBER 13-22-00203-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
ROBERTO RODRIGUEZ ESCAMILLA, Appellant,
v.
RICARDO CADENA, Appellee.
On appeal from the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.
ORDER Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Silva Order Per Curiam
This cause is before the Court on appellant’s motions for leave to file amended
brief. On December 20, 2022, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that his brief was
received but that it did not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX.
R. APP. P. 9.4(h); 38.8(b)(2), (3).On January 3, 2023, appellant filed an amended brief, and the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that his amended brief also did not comply.
Upon review of appellant’s amended brief, we find that the brief contains numerous formal
defects, and that the case has not been properly presented. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9. In
particular, the brief does not conform to rule 38.1(a) and (i) of the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(a), (i).
Accordingly, appellant’s motions for leave to file a brief are denied, and, under the
authority of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.9(a) and (b), we order appellant to
amend or redraw the brief to conform to the rule within thirty days from the date of this
Order. If the new brief is filed in compliance with this order, no motion for leave shall be
required. Furthermore, appellant is hereby notified that if another brief does not comply,
it may be stricken, and appellant may be prohibited from filing another brief. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 38.9. In that circumstance, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of
prosecution and appellant’s failure to comply with this Court’s directive and the appellate
rules. See id. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), (c).
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed on the 31st day of January, 2023.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Roberto Rodriguez Escamilla v. Ricardo Cadena, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberto-rodriguez-escamilla-v-ricardo-cadena-texapp-2023.