In re Signorelli Co.
446 S.W.3d 470
Tex. App.2014Background
- Relators seek mandamus to force transfer from Harris County to Montgomery County under §15.011, as Montgomery hosts the Bella Vita property.
- Bella Vita development located in Montgomery County; Signorelli prepared the Declaration and acted as New Construction Committee.
- Champion and Signorelli entered into an Approved Builder Purchase Agreement; Champion paid for two lots to become an approved builder.
- Champion filed suit in Harris County alleging fraud, statutory fraud, breach of Builders Agreement and Declaration, DTPA, plus declaratory judgment and rescission seeks to recover/alter title to real property.
- Signorelli moved to transfer venue arguing §15.011 is mandatory; trial court denied; issue centers on whether the suit’s essence involves an interest in real property under §15.011.
- Court concludes §15.011 applies because Champion’s rescission claim would affect title to real property, thus Montgomery is the proper venue and mandamus is granted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §15.011 applies to compel Montgomery venue | Champion argues §15.011 does not apply | Signorelli contends §15.011 applies since property is in Montgomery | Yes; §15.011 applies |
| Whether the dominant purpose of the petition is rescission of the Builders Agreement | Champion asserts rescission is not the dominant purpose | Signorelli argues rescission seeks to transfer real property | Yes; rescission is the dominant remedy affecting property |
| Whether all claims arising from the same transaction must be in Montgomery if §15.011 applies | N/A | N/A | All related claims must be in Montgomery |
| Whether the court should narrowly construe §15.011 to require recovery of property only by the plaintiff | Champion advocates narrow reading | Signorelli urges broad reading including interests in real property | No; statute includes actions for an interest in real property; broad reading followed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Hardwick, 426 S.W.3d 151 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2012) (venue fixed when judgment would affect real property interests)
- In re Applied Chemical, 206 S.W.3d 114 (Tex. S. Ct. 2006) (section 15.011 includes actions for an ‘interest’ in real property)
- In re Lopez, 872 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. 2012) (mandamus relief to enforce mandatory venue provisions)
- Bracewell v. Fair, 638 S.W.2d 612 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1982) (strict construction of §15.011)
- Maranatha Temple, Inc. v. Enter. Prods. Co., 833 S.W.2d 736 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1992) (strict construction; must fall within statute)
- Poock v. Wash. Mut. Bank, F.A., 2009 WL 2050905 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (considered real property interest when rescission impacts title)
- In re Riata Energy, Inc., No. 01-00-01138-CV (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001) (mem. op.; real property interest considerations)
- James v. Eagle Rock Ranch, 304 S.W.2d 471 (Tex.Civ.App.-Austin 1957) (earlier view on rescission and property)
- Miller v. Lochridge, 416 S.W.2d 573 (Tex.Civ.App.-Houston 1967) (predecessor statute interpretation)