MR. AND MRS. MELVIN WILLMS, Appellants v. JIMMY WILSON D/B/A AMERICAS AUTOMOTIVE; AMERICAS TIRE CO., INC.; AND THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellees

AFFIRM; Opinion issued December 2, 2009
 
 
 
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
............................
No. 05-08-01718-CV
............................
MR. AND MRS. MELVIN WILLMS, Appellants
V.
JIMMY WILSON D/B/A AMERICAS AUTOMOTIVE; AMERICAS TIRE CO., INC.; AND THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellees
 
.............................................................
On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-08-09166
.............................................................
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices O'Neill, Francis, and Lang
Opinion By Justice Francis
        The trial court dismissed Mr. and Mrs. Melvin Willmses' lawsuit after determining they had been previously declared vexatious litigants but had failed to obtain permission from the local administrative judge to maintain this action as required by section 11.103(b) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. In five issues, appellants contend the trial court erred when “it failed to heed Plaintiffs' warning of fraud,” dismissed the claim “due to the Defendants [sic] claims”, preempted statute with case law, conducted a hearing without a court reporter, and denied their motion for new trial.
        After appellants filed their original brief, this Court notified them by letter that the brief was deficient in several respects, most notably that it did not contain appropriate citations to the record as required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1(d), (f), and (h). Appellants were given time to cure the deficiencies.
        Appellants then filed their amended brief. The amended brief, however, still does not contain a single citation to the clerk's record as required by rule 38.1. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1. Rather, all citations are to the appendix to their brief.
        An appendix is not a substitute for a clerk's record nor are citations to the appendix a substitute for citations to the record. In the Interest of L.M.M., No. 05-07-00789-CV, slip op. at 1 (Tex. App.-Dallas June 19, 2008, no pet.) (mem. op.). Because appellant has not provided any record citations, despite an opportunity to correct this deficiency, we conclude nothing is preserved for review. See id. We overrrule all issues.
        We affirm the trial court's dismissal order.
 
 
                                                          
                                                          MOLLY FRANCIS
                                                          JUSTICE
 
081718F.P05