Reported / Citable
Background
Raymond Steffan Davis Jr. appealed a judgment from the 360th District Court of Tarrant County, Texas (Trial Court No. 360-772875-25) against Shailair D. Simms. Davis’s appellant’s brief was due on May 1, 2026, but was not filed by that deadline.
On May 13, 2026, the Second Court of Appeals notified Davis that his brief had not been filed as required under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.6(a). The court warned that the appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution unless, by May 26, 2026, Davis filed both a brief and an accompanying motion reasonably explaining the untimely filing and why an extension was needed. Davis filed no response.
The Court’s Holding
The court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. Because Davis failed to file a brief even after the court provided an opportunity to cure the default and explain the initial failure, the panel found no basis to allow the appeal to proceed.
The court relied on Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), and 43.2(f), which collectively authorize dismissal when an appellant fails to file a required brief. The court also assessed all costs of the appeal against Davis.
Key Takeaways
- An appellant’s failure to file an opening brief by the due date — and failure to respond to a court’s cure notice — warrants dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution under Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3(b).
- Texas appellate courts will give appellants a second chance to explain a missed briefing deadline before dismissing, but silence in response to that notice leaves the court no choice but to dismiss.
- When an appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution, the appellant bears all costs of the appeal.
Why It Matters
This per curiam decision is a straightforward reminder that Texas appellate deadlines are strictly enforced. Missing the briefing deadline is not, by itself, automatically fatal — courts will issue a notice and afford a short window to file the brief and explain the delay. But ignoring that notice entirely leaves a court with no discretion: dismissal follows as a matter of rule.
For practitioners, the case underscores the importance of calendaring appellate deadlines carefully and responding promptly to any court notices, even when an extension is needed. A timely motion explaining the circumstances can preserve the appeal; silence cannot.