Leta York v. Todd Boatman
06-15-00030-CV
| Tex. Crim. App. | Oct 19, 2015Background
- Dispute over title to 153.185 acres in Hopkins County between Leta York (appellant, grandmother) and Todd Boatman (appellee, grandson). Trial court awarded title to appellee but preserved for York an equitable life estate in a 4‑acre parcel.
- Key instruments: 1967 deed (4‑acre life estate to Leta and husband, remainder to daughter Gwendolyn), 1985 partition deed (153.185 acres to Leta), 1995 deed from Leta to daughter Gwendolyn conveying 153.185 acres, and an unrecorded/revoked 2003 gift deed from Gwendolyn back to Leta.
- Leta contends the 1995 deed was not an effective inter vivos gift but was a transfer in trust (or an attempted future gift) with an agreement that Gwendolyn would reconvey on request.
- Appellee claims the 1995 deed was an outright gift to his mother (separate property) and he inherited full title as sole devisee of Gwendolyn.
- Trial court found the 1995 conveyance valid (subject to Leta’s 4‑acre life estate and husband’s homestead), and that statutes of limitations barred Leta’s title claims except as to the life estate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (York) | Defendant's Argument (Boatman) | Held by Trial Court |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of 1995 deed as an inter vivos gift | 1995 deed is not a present gift: defective description (fails to except 4‑acre life estate), violates homestead rules (husband did not join), lacked donative intent, delivery, and acceptance | 1995 deed was a gift conveying full title to Gwendolyn; appellee inherited title | Trial court found the 1995 deed valid (subject to life estate and homestead interest) and awarded title to appellee |
| Effect of homestead / life‑estate on conveyance | Because husband’s homestead and the 4‑acre life estate were outstanding, the 1995 deed could not convey a full present possessory interest — supports invalidity or trust/resulting trust | Deed operated as a gift and Gwendolyn later treated it as her separate property | Court recognized the life estate and husband’s homestead as surviving interests but still treated the deed as operative for remainder/title to appellee |
| Existence of constructive or resulting trust | If deed was not intended as a gift, a constructive/resulting trust arose (fiduciary/confidential relationship); reconveyance agreement and writings support trust; no unequivocal repudiation during Gwendolyn’s life so statute of limitations did not run | No trust — deed was an outright gift; no agreement to reconvey | Trial court found statute of limitations barred most of Leta’s title claims (implying constructive‑trust/repudiation defenses failed at trial) |
| When limitations begin to run / notice of repudiation | Limitations did not run while fiduciary/constructive trust existed because repudiation was not plain, strong, and brought home to Leta; she reasonably relied on daughter and didn’t know tax/possession changes until after Gwendolyn’s death | Appellee relies on recorded deed, tax payments and other acts as sufficient notice and conduct establishing title and starting limitations | Trial court concluded applicable statutes of limitation cut off Leta’s claims except as to the 4‑acre life estate |
Key Cases Cited
- Richardson v. Laney, 911 S.W.2d 489 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1995) (presumption of gift from parent to child is rebuttable; resulting trust may arise where no donative intent)
- Gomer v. Davis, 419 S.W.3d 470 (Tex. App.—Houston 2013) (elements and requirements for an inter vivos gift: donative intent, delivery, acceptance)
- Benavides v. Benavides, 218 S.W. 566 (Tex. App. 1920) (delivery and acceptance of a deed are concurrent; possession, tax acts, and conduct can rebut presumptions of delivery)
- Mills v. Gray, 210 S.W.2d 985 (Tex. 1948) (constructive/resulting trust principles where conveyance induced by agreement to reconvey)
- Kostelnik v. Roberts, 680 S.W.2d 532 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1984) (constructive trust may arise where property conveyed under promise by confidant to reconvey and promise is breached)
- Pick v. Bartel, 659 S.W.2d 636 (Tex. 1983) (statute of frauds requires deed to identify land with reasonable certainty)