Eric Murdock v. Jacqueline Marie Patterson Appeal from 461st District Court of Brazoria County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 7, 2023 In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-23-00457-CV ERIC MURDOCK, Appellant V. JACQUELINE MARIE PATTERSON, Appellee On Appeal from the 461st District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 107857-F MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal from a decree of divorce signed June 29, 2023. On September 8, 2023, appellant tendered a brief that did not comply with the briefing requirements set forth in Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1. The brief was returned to appellant for correction. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(i) (permitting court to return nonconforming documents for correction). Most significantly, appellant has failed to make any legal arguments to support reversal of the judgment, and the brief contains no citations to the record or to legal authorities. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(h). Appellant provides no legal reason to set aside the judgment entered by the trial court. While we are not unsympathetic to appellant’s position, a point of error unsupported by citation of any legal authority presents nothing for the court to review. See Richard v. Cornerstone Constructors, Inc., 921 S.W.2d 465, 469 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1996, writ denied). Pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys, and they must therefore comply with all applicable rules of procedure. Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181, 184-85 (Tex. 1978) (holding that litigants who represent themselves must comply with procedures established by rules notwithstanding fact that they are not licensed attorneys); Sedillo v. Campbell, 5 S.W.3d 824, 829 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1999, no pet.); Kanow v. Brownshadel, 691 S.W.2d 804, 806 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 1985, no writ). On September 26, 2023, we issued an order striking appellant’s brief and ordered appellant to file a compliant brief within 10 days. We instructed appellant that if appellant failed to file a compliant brief the appeal was subject to dismissal without further notice for want of prosecution. Appellant filed no brief or other response. We dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Bourliot and Hassan. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
