TX · rules
Tex. R. App. P. 38.8
Failure of Appellant to File Brief
(a) Civil Cases. If an appellant fails to timely file
a brief, the appellate court may:
(1) dismiss the appeal for want of
prosecution, unless the appellant
reasonably explains the failure and the
appellee is not significantly injured by
the appellant's failure to timely file a
brief;
(2) decline to dismiss the appeal and give
further direction to the case as it
considers proper; or
(3) if an appellee’s brief is filed, the court
may regard that brief as correctly
presenting the case and may affirm the
trial court's judgment upon that brief
without examining the record.
(b) Criminal Cases.
(1) Effect. An appellant's failure to timely
file a brief does not authorize either
dismissal of the appeal or, except as
provided in (4), consideration of the
appeal without briefs.
(2) Notice. If the appellant's brief is not
timely filed, the appellate clerk must
notify counsel for the parties and the trial
court of that fact. If the appellate court
does not receive a satisfactory response
within ten days, the court must order the
trial court to immediately conduct a
hearing to determine whether the
appellant desires to prosecute his appeal,
whether the appellant is indigent, or, if
not indigent, whether retained counsel
has abandoned the appeal, and to make
appropriate findings and
recommendations.
(3) Hearing. In accordance with (2), the trial
court must conduct any necessary
hearings, make appropriate findings and
recommendations, and have a record of
the proceedings prepared, which record
— including any order and findings —
must be sent to the appellate court.
(4) Appellate Court Action. Based on the
trial court's record, the appellate court
may act appropriately to ensure that the
appellant's rights are protected,
including initiating contempt
proceedings against appellant's counsel.
If the trial court has found that the
appellant no longer desires to prosecute
the appeal, or that the appellant is not
indigent but has not made the necessary
arrangements for filing a brief, the
appellate court may consider the appeal
without briefs, as justice may require.
History
Notes and Comments Comment to 1997 change: This is former Rule 74. The rule is substantially rewritten. Paragraph 38. 1(e) now specifically allows a party to either present issues or points of error. Paragraphs 38.1(f) and (g) are new and require a brief to include a statement of facts and summary of the argument. Paragraph 38.2(b) is new and gives specific requirements for cross-points. See also TEX. R. CIV. P. 324(c). Subdivision 38.3 is new and provides for a reply brief. Subdivision 38.4 imposes a total brief limit of 90 pages on each party. Thus, if more than one party has filed a notice of appeal, there will be multiple appellant’s, appellee’s, and reply briefs, but each party is limited to a total of 90 pages. Subdivision 38.5 is new and provides for an appendix in cases recorded electronically in the trial court. Paragraph 38.6(b) now provides that the appellee has 30 — rather than 25 — days to file a brief. The provisions of former Rules 74(I) (Number of Copies), (j) (Briefs Typewritten or Printed), and (q) (Service of Briefs) are omitted as unnecessary. See Rule 9. Comment to 2002 change: Rule 38.6(d) is amended to clarify that an appellate court may postpone the filing of any brief, not just the appellant's brief. Comment to 2008 change: A party may choose to include a statement in the brief regarding oral argument. The optional statement does not count toward the briefing page limit.
Provenance
- Source
- txcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
dd735b6c65e78141d8f95e49caf2dbd48d8ccc65e05e11f7f6f3b07951111495
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.