Jerry Vernon v. William Perrien and Roxanne Perrien
390 S.W.3d 47
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Vernon appeals a judgment in favor of Perriens awarding title to the Property and dismissing Vernon’s claims.
- The Property is Tract 3-B-34, W.F. Hagan Survey No. 146, El Paso County, Texas; Shaw owned it per 1992 judgment; Perriens later purchased from Shaw in 2000.
- Mexada Corporation (Nevada) purportedly held a 90% interest via a 1992 deed; Vernon is Mexada’s president/secretary in various capacities.
- Perriens filed suit February 4, 2008 to quiet title and for a declaratory judgment, asserting cloud removal and damages; later amended to include Vernon/Mexada as defendants and add a claim for civil conspiracy.
- The trial court found Perriens hold 100% fee simple title, discharged the 1992 and quitclaim deeds as clouds, awarded compensatory and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees; Vernon appeals on jurisdiction, res judicata/collateral estoppel, and sufficiency of title
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the judgment is void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction | Vernon argues a trespass to try title is the sole remedy. | Perriens contend DJA claims adequately raised title issues and allowed declaratory relief. | Subject matter jurisdiction exists; DJA claims encompassed trespass-to-try-title, so no void judgment. |
| Whether res judicata and collateral estoppel apply | Vernon asserts lack of privity and different capacity in 1992 suit. | Perriens prove privity and same-claims basis; 1992 judgment bound Mexada and Vernon. | Vernon and Mexada in privity with Vernon; 1992 judgment res judicata and collateral estoppel binding. |
| Whether Perriens established superior title under trespass to try title (common source) | Vernon contends title claim fails via lack of chain or common source. | Perriens linked to Shaw through 2000 purchase and 1992 deed chain; quitclaim to Vernon clouds improper. | Perriens demonstrated superior title; June 8, 1992 deed void; cloud removed; Perriens hold title. |
| Whether attorney’s fees were proper in declaratory judgment action | Fees unsupported where action is not properly DJA-based. | Perriens sought fees under DJA; Vernon did not preserve challenge. | No reversible error; fee award sustained. |
| Whether exemplary damages are warranted | Malice by Vernon via post-suit quitclaim deed to cloud title. | Evidence insufficient for malice or conscious intent. | Evidence supports malice; exemplary damages affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Martin v. Amerman, 133 S.W.3d 262 (Tex. 2004) (title disputes; standard of proof for chain of title)
- Ramsey v. Grizzle, 313 S.W.3d 498 (Tex.App.--Texarkana 2010) (trespass-to-try-title prerequisites; proof of title)
- Teon Management, LLC v. Turquoise Bay Corporation, 357 S.W.3d 719 (Tex.App.--Eastland 2012) (DJ Act does not strip jurisdiction; declaratory relief remedies exist within proper claims)
- Sawyer Trust, 354 S.W.3d 384 (Tex. 2011) (DJA subject-matter limits and usage)
- Parker v. Hunegnaw, 364 S.W.3d 398 (Tex.App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 2012) (declaratory relief can encompass title issues when appropriate)
- Rogers v. Ricane Enterprises, Inc., 884 S.W.2d 763 (Tex. 1994) (trespass-to-try-title feasibility via common source)
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (standard of legal sufficiency; no-evidence review)
- Seber v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 350 S.W.3d 640 (Tex. 2011) (malice and clear-and-convincing standard)
- Qwest International Communications, Inc. v. AT&T Corporation, 167 S.W.3d 324 (Tex. 2005) (elevated standard of proof for exemplary damages)
- Amstadt v. U.S. Brass Corporation, 919 S.W.2d 644 (Tex. 1996) (privity concepts for res judicata)