Percelle v. Freedom Mortgage — Fifth Circuit affirmed dismissal because the homeowners forfeited and abandoned their appellate arguments

Case
Barry Percelle and Yolanda Percelle v. Freedom Mortgage Corporation and Real Star Property Management
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Judge
Patrick E. Higginbotham (Ronald Reagan, 1982); Jerry E. Smith (Ronald Reagan, 1987); James C. Ho (Donald Trump, 2017)
Date Decided
October 15, 2026
Docket No.
25-50962
Topics
Appellate Procedure; Summary Judgment; Inadequate Briefing
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Barry and Yolanda Percelle sued Freedom Mortgage Corporation and Real Star Property Management in the Western District of Texas. The district court granted both defendants’ motions for summary judgment and dismissed the Percelles’ claims after the Percelles failed to respond to the summary-judgment motions.

On appeal, the Percelles argued that the district court improperly denied their motion for a temporary restraining order without balancing the equities under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65. They also alleged procedural-due-process error concerning Real Star’s untimely response following removal and asserted that the district court failed to address spoliation, concealment, removal defects, and a state-court bond.

The Court’s Holding

The Fifth Circuit affirmed. It held that the Percelles forfeited any argument that the district court erred in granting summary judgment based on their failure to respond to the defendants’ motions because they did not raise that contention on appeal.

The court further held that, even construing the pro se Percelles’ briefing liberally, they abandoned the issues they did identify because they failed to brief them adequately as required by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(a)(8)(A). The court therefore did not reach the merits of their challenges concerning injunctive relief, due process, spoliation, concealment, removal, or the bond.

Key Takeaways

  • An appellant forfeits a challenge to the basis of a summary-judgment ruling by failing to raise that challenge in the appellate brief.
  • Pro se litigants receive liberal construction of their filings, but they must still adequately brief their appellate arguments.
  • Listing alleged errors without sufficient legal argument does not preserve those issues for appellate review.

Why It Matters

The decision underscores that appellate briefing rules can be dispositive. An appeal may fail without consideration of the underlying merits when the brief neither challenges the district court’s stated basis for judgment nor adequately develops the issues presented.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top