Teresa Corral-Lerma v. Border Demolition & Environmental Inc., as a Corporation, Raul Solis, Individually and Bonnie Solis, Individually
2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 4843
| Tex. App. | 2015Background
- In 2008 the City condemned a house on 7429 Rose Lane Circle. Teresa Corral-Lerma claims she owns the property; her husband Eduardo Lerma had earlier conveyed an interest to her but represented himself as owner in dealings.
- Eduardo solicited a demolition bid from Border Demolition (owned by Raul and Bonnie Solis) and forwarded the proposed contract to Teresa; neither she nor Eduardo signed the contract.
- Border Demolition’s subcontractor demolished the house in July 2008, entering after tearing down a front gate; plaintiff contends Border Demolition removed personal property.
- Corral-Lerma sued for multiple torts including intentional/negligent trespass, fraud/negligent misrepresentation, conversion, and civil theft; defendants moved for hybrid (no‑evidence + traditional) summary judgment.
- Trial later awarded Border Demolition attorneys’ fees under the Texas Theft Liability Act; on appeal the court affirmed summary judgment as to most claims, reversed as to trespass, and suggested a remittitur of attorney’s fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trespass (intentional & negligent) | Corral‑Lerma: demolition and entry were unauthorized; nominal damages presumed for trespass. | Border Demolition: either Eduardo retained ownership or had (actual/apparent) authority to consent to entry. | Reversed summary judgment as to Border Demolition; disputed facts on ownership/agency preclude summary judgment; trespass claim survives. |
| Fraudulent & Negligent Misrepresentation | Corral‑Lerma: Border Demolition promised not to demolish until final agreement and she relied on those assurances. | Border Demolition: no evidence of false statement of existing fact or detrimental reliance. | Affirmed summary judgment; negligent misrep. fails because promise about future conduct is not negligent misrep.; fraud fails for lack of detrimental reliance. |
| Conversion | Corral‑Lerma: Border Demolition removed antiques/fixtures and exercised dominion over personalty. | Border Demolition: items alleged are fixtures/realty not subject to conversion; plaintiff offered no evidence distinguishing personalty from fixtures. | Affirmed summary judgment; conversion claim fails because many items alleged are or may be realty and plaintiff did not provide evidence they remained personalty. |
| Attorneys’ fees under Texas Theft Liability Act | Corral‑Lerma: defendants waived fees by not moving for SJ on fees and failed to segregate recoverable fees. | Border Demolition: did not waive (partial SJ was proper); experts and invoices supported segregation; fees largely recoverable post‑pleading. | Did not find waiver; segregation evidence adequate but jury award exceeded legally supportable amount by $3,033.81 — court suggests remittitur or new trial on fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Merriman v. XTO Energy, Inc., 407 S.W.3d 244 (Tex. 2013) (standard for hybrid summary judgment/no‑evidence review)
- Timpte Indus., Inc. v. Gish, 286 S.W.3d 306 (Tex. 2009) (no‑evidence summary judgment review)
- Coastal Oil & Gas Corp. v. Garza Energy Trust, 268 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. 2008) (nominal damages and trespass principles)
- Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Morris, 981 S.W.2d 667 (Tex. 1998) (apparent authority discussed)
- NationsBank, N.A. v. Dilling, 922 S.W.2d 950 (Tex. 1996) (apparent authority limited to principal’s conduct)
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (legal sufficiency standards for reviewing evidence)
- Haygood v. De Escabedo, 356 S.W.3d 390 (Tex. 2011) (standard for reviewing sufficiency challenges on damages)