Christopher T. Brady v. Karen Brady--Appeal from 166th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-03-00844-CV
Christopher T. BRADY,
Appellant
v.
Karen BRADY,
Appellee
From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2003-CI-02512
Honorable Janet P. Littlejohn, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Sitting: Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 18, 2004

AFFIRMED

Christopher T. Brady ("Brady") appeals from a final divorce decree. We overrule Brady's issues and affirm the trial court's judgment.

On September 19, 2003, the trial court signed a final decree of divorce dissolving the marriage between Christopher Brady and Karen Brady, dividing the marital estate and determining conservatorship of the children. Brady timely filed notice of appeal on September 19, 2003. In his pro se appellant's brief, Brady presents a "point of error" stating that the trial court "erred in entering the order entitled 'Agreed Order Modifying Prior Orders in Suit Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship' with additional terms which were not agreed on [at] the mediation and to which Appellant filed objections." Brady's brief also lists other "issues presented," which consist of statements that the trial court erred in denying DNA testing with respect to paternity, dividing the community estate, characterizing the parties' debts, determining conservatorship and possession of the children, setting the amount of child support and entering a permanent injunction against him. Brady also asserts that the court erred in denying his motion for appointment of counsel after his attorney withdrew and in failing to grant a continuance. The appellate record does not contain the motion to modify or agreed order modifying a prior order affecting the parent-child relationship referenced by Brady. (1) The only order or judgment contained in the appellate record is the final divorce decree. Therefore, we will assume that Brady is appealing from the final divorce decree and consider his appeal from that perspective.

An appellate brief "must contain a clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities and to the record." Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(h). Brady's brief fails to contain a "clear and concise argument for the contentions made," and fails to contain any citations to authorities and to the record in support of his arguments, as required by Rule 38.1(h). Id. We recognize that Brady included an index of authorities in his brief which lists several cases and statutes, but he fails to cite, discuss or analyze any of those authorities in the body of his brief. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(c), (h). Failure to cite authority on an issue waives that issue. See Keever v. Finlan, 988 S.W.2d 300, 314 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1999, pet. dismissed); see also Franz v. Katy Indep. Sch. Dist., 35 S.W.3d 749, 755 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

Here, Brady wholly fails to cite any authority to support his contentions. The only authority cited by Brady in his brief is Section 153.0071(d) of the Texas Family Code, which he cites in support of his claim that the court erred in entering judgment based on a mediated settlement agreement which was not signed by both parties. There is nothing in the record to support Brady's contention. With respect to the rest of his issues, Brady cites no authority at all. Because Brady does nothing more than summarily state his point of error and issues on appeal, without citations to the record, legal authorities or substantive or clear analysis, we conclude Brady has failed to preserve these arguments for review. We overrule Brady's point of error and issues on appeal.

For the foregoing reasons, the trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

1. Brady's appendix fails to include a copy of the trial court's judgment or order from which he is appealing as required by Rule 38.1(j)(1)(A), Tex. R. App. P.