DISMISSED and Opinion Filed August 8, 2017

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-00985-CV MINH NGUYEN AND HSIULING NGUYEN, Appellants V. TORINO ENGLISH, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 005-01041-2016 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Francis, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Pro se appellants appeal the trial court’s judgment awarding damages to appellee for unjust withholding of security deposit and allegations of late fees and property damage. On March 3, 2017, appellants filed a brief. By letter dated March 17, 2017, we notified appellants that the brief was deficient and instructed them to file an amended brief correcting the noted deficiencies within ten days. We cautioned appellants that failure to file an amended brief within ten days may result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. See TEX. R. APP. P 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b),(c).

Although individuals have the right to represent themselves as pro se litigants in civil cases, they are required to follow the same rules of appellate procedure that licensed attorneys are required to follow. See Bolling v. Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist., 315 S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010, no pet.). Appellate court judges are not responsible for “identifying possible trial court error” or favorable facts or law to support parties’ contentions. Id. Importantly, under rule 38.1(f), the court “must be able to discern what question[s] of law [it] will be answering.” Id. at 896. A brief fails if it does not articulate the issues to be answered by the court. Id. If a brief articulates the issues to be decided by the court, “then rule 38.1(i) calls for the brief to guide [the court] through the appellant’s argument with clear and understandable statements of the contentions being made.” Id. Under Rule 38.1(i), appellant’s argument must make direct references to facts in the record and applicable legal authority. Id. A brief fails under rule 38.1(i) if the court must speculate or guess if references to facts or legal authority “are not made or are inaccurate, misstated, or misleading.” Id. In their brief, appellants raise three issues. In the summary of the argument section of the brief, appellants cite to two cases. The citations are inaccurate and this Court is unable to locate the cases. In the argument section of the brief, appellants cite to the clerk’s record but they do not cite to any legal authority. Because appellants have not provided the Court with existing legal authority that can be applied to the facts of the case, the brief fails. See Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 896.

Because appellants have failed to comply with the briefing requirements of our appellate rules after having been given the opportunity to do so, we dismiss the appeal. TEX. R. APP. P 42.3(c).

/Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE 160985F.P05 –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT MINH NGUYEN AND On Appeal from the County Court at Law HSIULING NGUYEN, Appellants No. 5, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 005-01041-2016.

No. 05-16-00985-CV V. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright.

Justices Francis and Stoddart participating.

TORINO ENGLISH, Appellee In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee TORINO ENGLISH recover his costs of this appeal from appellants MINH NGUYEN AND HSIULING NGUYEN.

Judgment entered August 8, 2017.

–3–