assertion of reversible error in Texas

2014See Barnett v. Coppell N. Tex. Court, Ltd., 123 S.W.3d 804, 817 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2003, pet. denied) (“An appellate court has no duty to search a voluminous record without sufficient guidance from an appellant to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid.”); Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge v. Jackson, 732 S.W.2d 407, 412 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1987, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (en banc) (“This court is not required to search the record for evidence supporting a litigant’s position under particular points of error .... ”); see also Tex.R.App.

2009Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge v. Jackson , 732 S.W.2d 407, 412 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1987, writ ref'd n.r.e.); see Rendleman v. Clarke , 909 S.W. 2d 56, 58 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, writ dism'd) (stating that an appellate court has no duty to search a voluminous record without guidance from the appellant to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid).

2015The Dx reference does not support the record, and this court is not required sift through the record without guidance from the party to find support for a party's bare assertion of error."7 Crider v. Crider, No. 01-10- 00268-CV, 2011 WL 2651794 , at *5 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] July 7, 2011, pet. denied) (mem. op.); see Nguyen v. Kosnoski, 93 S.W.3d 186, 188 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.) ("This Court has no duty to search a voluminous record without guidance from Nguyen to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid."). "[E]rror may be waived by inadequate

2015At some point, they reconnected and record without sufficient guidance from an appellant to resumed their friendship, but little evidence was presented determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid. concerning the nature and extent of the relationship from that Nguyen v. Kosnoski, 93 S.W.3d 186, 188 (Tex.App.-Houston point until the employment negotiations began.

2010In re M.J.G., 248 S.W.3d at 760 ; Dallas Independent School District v. Finlan, 27 S.W.3d 220, 237 (Tex.App.--Dallas 2000, pet. denied).

2010In re M.J.G. , 248 S.W.3d at 760 ; Dallas Independent School District v. Finlan , 27 S.W.3d 220, 237 (Tex.App.--Dallas 2000, pet. denied).

2011Labrador Oil Co. v. Norton Drilling Co., 1 S.W.3d 795, 803 (Tex.App.--Amarillo 1999, no pet.). 10 System and not a corporation or legal entity with the capacity to be sued.

2007Labrador Oil Co. v. Norton Drilling Co. , 1 S.W.3d 795, 803 (Tex.App.–Amarillo 1999, no pet.); Granada Biosciences , Inc. v. Barrett , 958 S.W.2d 215, 222 (Tex.App.–Amarillo 1997, pet. denied).

2026See In re Marriage of Peralta & Garcia, No. 05-23-00217-CV, 2025 WL 251339 , at *1 n.1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan. 21, 2025, no pet.) (noting that it is not the appellate court’s duty to search the record for evidence supporting an appellant’s arguments); Barnett v. Coppell N. Tex. Ct., Ltd., 123 S.W.3d 804, 817 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, pet. denied) (“An appellate court has no duty to search a voluminous record without sufficient guidance from an appellant to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid.”).23 Accordingly, we overrule Williams’s fourth issue.

2016P. 38.1(i) (the appellant has the duty to cite to portions of the record that allegedly support his position); Barnett v. Coppell N. Tex. Court, Ltd., 123 S.W.3d 804, 817 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, pet. denied) (stating that an appellate court has no duty to search a voluminous record without sufficient guidance from an appellant to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid).

2023See Valadez, 238 S.W.3d at 845 (“An appellate court has no duty—or even right—to perform an independent review of the record and applicable law to determine whether there was error.”); see also In re B.T.D., 2017 WL 343613 , at *7 (“[W]e have ‘no duty to search a voluminous record without guidance from appellant to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid.’”) (quoting Casteel– Diebolt v. Diebolt, 912 S.W.2d 302, 305 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, no writ)).

2023But, “[t]his Court has no duty to search a voluminous record without guidance from appellant to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid.” Casteel-Diebolt v. Diebolt, 912 S.W.2d 302, 305 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, no writ).

2008Melendez v. Exxon Corp. , 998 S.W.2d 266, 280 (Tex. App. C Houston [14th Dist.] 1999, no pet.).

2004Finlan, 27 S.W.3d at 237 ; Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge, 732 S.W.2d at 412 ; see Melendez, 998 S.W.2d at 280 .

2007Labrador Oil Co. v. Norton Drilling Co. , 1 S.W.3d 795, 803 (Tex.App.–Amarillo 1999, no pet.); Granada Biosciences , Inc. v. Barrett , 958 S.W.2d 215, 222 (Tex.App.–Amarillo 1997, pet. denied).

2007Labrador Oil Co. v. Norton Drilling Co. , 1 S.W.3d 795, 803 (Tex.App.–Amarillo 1999, no pet.); Granada Biosciences , Inc. v. Barrett , 958 S.W.2d 215, 222 (Tex.App.–Amarillo 1997, pet. denied).

2009Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge v. Jackson , 732 S.W.2d 407, 412 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1987, writ ref'd n.r.e.); see Rendleman v. Clarke , 909 S.W. 2d 56, 58 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, writ dism'd) (stating that an appellate court has no duty to search a voluminous record without guidance from the appellant to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid).

2003Most Worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge v. Jackson, 732 S.W.2d 407, 412 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1987, writ ref'd n.r.e.); see Rendleman v. Clarke, 909 S.W.2d 56, 58 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, writ dism'd) (stating that an appellate court has no duty to search a voluminous record without guidance from the appellant to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid).

2023App. 1995) (appellate court is not required “to pore through hundreds of pages of record in an attempt to verify an appellant’s claims”); Thierry v. State, 288 S.W.3d 80, 86 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009, pet. ref’d); see also Belle v. State, 543 S.W.3d 871, 879 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2018, no pet.) (“[W]e are under no duty to make an independent search of the record to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid.”).

2023It is not our obligation to divine or develop issues for him.” Louis v. State, 61 3 S.W.3d 593, 599 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2001, pet. ref’d). “[W]e are under no duty to make an independent search of the record to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid.” Belle v. State, 543 S.W.3d 871, 879 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2018, no pet.).

1998See Stevens v. Stevens, 809 S.W.2d 512, 513 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, no writ); Most Worshipful Prince Hall v. Jackson, 732 S.W.2d 407, 412 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1987, writ ref'd n.r.e.).

1995Stevens v. Stevens, 809 S.W.2d 512, 513 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, no writ); Most Worshipful Prince Hall v. Jackson, 732 S.W.2d 407, 412 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1987, writ refd n.r.e.).

2010In re M.J.G., 248 S.W.3d at 760 ; Dallas Independent School District v. Finlan, 27 S.W.3d 220, 237 (Tex.App.--Dallas 2000, pet. denied).

2010In re M.J.G. , 248 S.W.3d at 760 ; Dallas Independent School District v. Finlan , 27 S.W.3d 220, 237 (Tex.App.--Dallas 2000, pet. denied).

2018See Segundo, 270 S.W.3d at 106 ; Cook , 611 S.W.2d at 87 ; see also Lape , 893 S.W.2d at 953 .

2011See Cook v. State, 611 S.W.2d 83, 87 (Tex. Crim.

2024Keyes Helium Co. v. Regency Gas Servs., L.P., 393 S.W.3d 858, 861 (Tex. App.— Dallas 2012, no pet.).

2023See Valadez, 238 S.W.3d at 845 (“An appellate court has no duty—or even right—to perform an independent review of the record and applicable law to determine whether there was error.”); see also In re B.T.D., 2017 WL 343613 , at *7 (“[W]e have ‘no duty to search a voluminous record without guidance from appellant to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid.’”) (quoting Casteel– Diebolt v. Diebolt, 912 S.W.2d 302, 305 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, no writ)).

2023“Nothing is preserved for review if the appellant does not direct the [C]ourt to the proper place in the record where we may find the complained-of error.” Torres v. State, 979 S.W.2d 668, 671 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, no pet.).

2023App. 1995) (appellate court is not required “to pore through hundreds of pages of record in an attempt to verify an appellant’s claims”); Thierry v. State, 288 S.W.3d 80, 86 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009, pet. ref’d); see also Belle v. State, 543 S.W.3d 871, 879 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2018, no pet.) (“[W]e are under no duty to make an independent search of the record to determine whether an assertion of reversible error is valid.”).

2018See Segundo, 270 S.W.3d at 106 ; Cook , 611 S.W.2d at 87 ; see also Lape , 893 S.W.2d at 953 .

2018See Segundo v. State, 270 S.W.3d 79 , 106 (Tex. Crim.

2018See Segundo, 270 S.W.3d at 106 ; Cook , 611 S.W.2d at 87 ; see also Lape , 893 S.W.2d at 953 .

2017See Parex Res., Inc. v. ERG Res., LLC, 427 S.W.3d 407, 420 (Tex. App.Houston [14th Dist.] 2014), aff'd sub nom, Searcy v. Parex Res., Inc., 496 S.W.3d 58 (Tex. 2016); Nguyen v. Kosnoski, 93 S.W.3d 186, 188 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.).

2017See Parex Res., Inc. v. ERG Res., LLC, 427 S.W.3d 407, 420 (Tex. App.Houston [14th Dist.] 2014), aff'd sub nom, Searcy v. Parex Res., Inc., 496 S.W.3d 58 (Tex. 2016); Nguyen v. Kosnoski, 93 S.W.3d 186, 188 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.).