Chang v. Lundry

A jury found Leroy Lundry (“Defendant”) liable for property damage he caused to land owned by Hsi-Lin and Yu Me Lee Chang (“Plaintiffs”). 1 On appeal, Defendant claims the trial court erred in three respects, i.e., two claims of instruc tional error and one point related to the sufficiency of the evidence. Plaintiffs have filed a motion with this court to dismiss Defendant’s appeal because he failed to comply with the mandatory briefing requirements of Rule 84.04. 2 Because we find Plaintiffs’ motion meritorious, we dismiss the appeal.

Allegations of error not properly briefed “shall not be…