Barbara D. Cosgrove, Individually and as the Trustee of the Charles and Barbara Cosgrove Family Revocable Living Trust v. Michael Cade and Billie Cade, 468 S.W.3d 32

Background

In 2006 the Cades sold two acres to Cosgrove; the real estate contract reserved mineral rights but the notarized deed—signed/initialed by the Cades—conveyed fee simple (omitting the mineral reservation).
The deed was recorded in October 2006; closing paperwork included a title-company form obligating parties to correct errors.
Chesapeake (lease operator) later notified the Cades of a problem with the deed; the Cades demanded a corrective deed in December 2010; Cosgrove asserted the statute of limitations barred relief.
The Cades sued in February 2011 seeking reformation of the deed and related claims (breach of contract, fee forfeiture, civil theft, tortious interference). Most claims carried a four-year limitations period.
Trial court granted summary judgment for Cosgrove as time-barred; the court of appeals reversed based on the discovery rule for mutual mistakes; Cosgrove appealed to the Texas Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held the Cades had immediate (irrebuttable) notice of an obvious omission; deed-reformation and related claims were barred by limitations and the court reversed, remanding attorney-fee issues.

Issues

Issue	Cades' Argument	Cosgrove's Argument	Held
Does the discovery rule toll limitations for a mutual mistake of omission in an unambiguous deed?	Discovery rule applies because the mistake is a mutual mistake and may be undiscoverable without inquiry.	A plainly evident omission is inherently discoverable; discovery rule does not apply.	Discovery rule does not apply to plain, material omissions in unambiguous deeds; limitations accrues at execution.
Are grantors charged with notice of deed contents (including omissions) under Property Code §13.002/public records?	§13.002 gives notice of existence only, not contents; grantors lacked constructive notice.	Recorded instruments put parties on notice of contents; obvious omissions are discoverable via public records.	§13.002/public-records notice can, as a matter of law, establish lack of diligence; grantors are charged with notice of obvious omissions.
When does a breach-of-contract claim based on refusal to execute a corrective deed accrue?	Accrual occurs when defendant refuses to sign the corrective deed (later act).	Accrual occurred at deed execution because grantor was on notice of the error then.	Accrual began at deed execution; recharacterizing the claim does not avoid limitations.
Is Cosgrove entitled to attorney fees?	N/A (Cosgrove sought fees after the trial court denied them).	Cosgrove argued fees were warranted under statutory provisions after prevailing on limitations.	Merits of fee award not decided; case remanded to court of appeals for determination.

Key Cases Cited

McClung v. Lawrence, 430 S.W.2d 179 (Tex. 1968) (plain omissions in a deed are "plainly evident" and charge grantors with notice)
Sullivan v. Barnett, 471 S.W.2d 39 (Tex. 1971) (rebuttable presumption that grantor knows mutual-mistake defects; exceptions exist)
Brown v. Havard, 593 S.W.2d 939 (Tex. 1980) (distinguishing ambiguous deeds and noting when mistakes are not "plainly evident")
HECI Exploration Co. v. Neel, 982 S.W.2d 881 (Tex. 1998) (public records can create constructive notice and an irrebuttable presumption of actual notice)
Hooks v. Sampson Lone Star, Ltd. P'ship, 457 S.W.3d 52 (Tex. 2015) (reasonable diligence may require examining readily available public-record information)
Computer Assocs. Int’l, Inc. v. Altai, Inc., 918 S.W.2d 453 (Tex. 1996) (discovery-rule framework: inherently undiscoverable and objectively verifiable injury)
Via Net v. TIG Ins. Co., 211 S.W.3d 310 (Tex. 2006) (discovery rule focuses on types of injury, not causes of action)
Ford v. Exxon Mobil Chem. Co., 235 S.W.3d 615 (Tex. 2007) (public records in chain of title can impose constructive notice)
Shell Oil Co. v. Ross, 356 S.W.3d 924 (Tex. 2011) (duty of diligence can include monitoring public records)
Thigpen v. Locke, 363 S.W.2d 247 (Tex. 1962) (parties must read documents they sign)
Stine v. Stewart, 80 S.W.3d 586 (Tex. 2002) (when contract claim accrues)