Steele & Craft v. Texas Dow Employees Credit Union — Appeal dismissed for failure to file brief

Case
Jasmine Tavon Steele and Dajia Craft v. Texas Dow Employees Credit Union
Court
Texas Court of Appeals, First District
Date Decided
July 9, 2026
Docket No.
01-26-00299-CV
Topics
Appellate Procedure, Dismissal for Failure to File Brief

Background

Jasmine Tavon Steele and Dajia Craft appealed from a judgment rendered by the County Civil Court at Law No. 1 in Harris County, Texas. The appeal was docketed in the First District Court of Appeals as No. 01-26-00299-CV.

Appellants were required to file a brief within the time prescribed by the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. However, they failed to file a timely brief. The court issued a warning notice advising appellants that the appeal would be dismissed absent a reasonable explanation for the failure to comply.

The Court’s Holding

The appellants did not respond to the court’s warning or provide any explanation for their failure to file a brief. Accordingly, the court dismissed the appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(b)-(c), which permits involuntary dismissal when an appellant fails to comply with appellate filing requirements. All pending motions were dismissed as moot.

Key Takeaways

  • Appellants must comply with mandatory briefing deadlines under Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.6(a)
  • Failure to file a brief within the prescribed time is grounds for involuntary dismissal of an appeal
  • Courts will issue warnings before dismissal, but appellants must respond and provide reasonable explanations for non-compliance
  • Procedural defaults result in loss of appellate review on the merits

Why It Matters

This decision underscores the strict procedural requirements governing appellate practice in Texas. The briefing requirement is not merely administrative—failure to comply results in automatic dismissal and forfeiture of appellate rights. Practitioners must ensure compliance with filing deadlines and respond promptly to court orders or risk dismissal of their clients’ appeals.

The case serves as a cautionary reminder that appellate review is contingent upon strict adherence to procedural rules, and that courts will not defer dismissal when appellants ignore warnings and fail to engage with the appellate process.

✉️ 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