Opinion

Kim Carlene Jennings v. Segal Properties

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
Filed
Aug 15, 2025
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-25-00060-CV

Kim Carlene Jennings, Appellant

v.

Segal Properties, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF BELL COUNTY

NO. 24CCV01296, THE HONORABLE PAUL A. MOTZ, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Kim Jennings, appearing pro se, appeals from the trial court’s take-nothing

judgment in her suit against her former landlord, Segal Properties. However, even construed

liberally, Jennings’ appeal is inadequately briefed. See Henderson v. Armbrust & Brown, PLLC,

No. 03-24-00509-CV, 2025 WL 492506, at *3 (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 14, 2025, no pet.)

(mem. op.). While Jennings generally complains about a bedbug infestation at her former

residence, she has failed to:

• assign reversible error to any part of the trial court’s judgment or otherwise

present a legally cognizable issue for our review, see Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(f)

(requiring brief to “state concisely all issues or points presented for review”);

• provide substantive arguments, cite authority, or otherwise advance a legally

cognizable theory demonstrating why or how the trial court erred, see Tex. R.

App. P. 38.1(i) (requiring brief to “contain a clear and concise argument for the

contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities”); or

• pray for any legally cognizable form of relief, see Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(j)

(requiring brief to “contain a short conclusion that clearly states the nature of the

relief sought”).

In other words, Jennings has failed to say what the trial court did wrong, why it

was wrong, and how we can fix it. Holding Jennings to the same standard as parties represented

by counsel, we hold she has waived any issues that she may have by inadequate briefing.

Hughes v. Armadillo Props., No. 03-15-00698-CV, 2016 WL 5349380, at *2 (Tex. App.—

Austin Sept. 20, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.). Because Jennings’ brief presents nothing for our

review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

__________________________________________

Maggie Ellis, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly and Ellis

Affirmed

Filed: August 15, 2025

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.