Harold & Delores Patton v. Loancare, LLC
12-14-00230-CV
Tex. App.Sep 2, 2015Background
- Harold and Delores Patton purchased Shelby County property in 2009 and later defaulted on a deed of trust secured loan.
- LoanCare, LLC became beneficiary and purchased the property at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale; Pattons refused to vacate.
- LoanCare sued in justice court for forcible detainer; justice court ruled for Pattons and LoanCare appealed to county court.
- While the county-court forcible detainer was pending, the Pattons filed a district-court suit for wrongful foreclosure and breach of contract.
- In county court the Pattons moved to abate or consolidate the forcible detainer with the district action; the county court denied the motion, held a bench trial, and ruled for LoanCare, ordering eviction.
- Pattons appealed, arguing (1) the county court should have abated/transferred/consolidated because district court had superior jurisdiction over title-related claims, and (2) LoanCare’s evidence was hearsay.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Patton) | Defendant's Argument (LoanCare) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether county court must abate/consolidate because district court has superior jurisdiction over the property matters | District court action involves title and thus is a superior action that governs all rights; forcible detainer depends on resolution of that title dispute | Forcible detainer is limited to immediate possession; foreclosure sale created landlord/tenant-at-sufferance relationship allowing county court to decide possession without resolving title | County court had jurisdiction; forcible detainer may proceed concurrently with title actions in district court — motion to abate/consolidate denied |
| Whether LoanCare’s evidence was inadmissible hearsay and required reversal | LoanCare’s witness lacked personal knowledge; affidavit/account activity evidence should have been excluded | Record does not include reporter’s record of trial; appellants bore burden to provide record of reversible error; presumption evidence supports judgment | No reversible error shown because no reporter’s record filed; appeal overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- Yarbrough v. Household Fin. Corp. III, 455 S.W.3d 277 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015) (jurisdiction review standard and forcible detainer principles)
- Chinyere v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 440 S.W.3d 80 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012) (justice/county courts’ jurisdiction in forcible detainer limited to possession)
- Shutter v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 318 S.W.3d 467 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010) (title disputes cannot be resolved in forcible detainer)
- Black v. Washington Mut. Bank, 318 S.W.3d 414 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010) (possession can be decided by county court where a landlord/tenant-at-sufferance relationship exists)
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Ezell, 410 S.W.3d 919 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2013) (possession may be decided despite disputed validity of foreclosure sale)
- Bruce v. Fed. Nat’l Mortg. Ass’n, 352 S.W.3d 891 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011) (separate district-court suit may address title)
- Scott v. Hewitt, 90 S.W.2d 816 (Tex. 1936) (forcible detainer may be prosecuted concurrently with title actions)
- Englander Co. v. Kennedy, 428 S.W.2d 806 (Tex. 1968) (appellant’s duty to provide record for appeal)
- In re Guardianship of Berry, 105 S.W.3d 665 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2003) (presumption that omitted reporter’s record supports trial court)