Wilhoite, Sandra Lynn v. Sims, Linda Diane
2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 5497
| Tex. App. | 2013Background
- In 2004, Sandra Wilhoite and Linda Sims each owned a one-half interest in their grandfather’s Dallas house.
- In 2007, Sims quitclaimed her half to Wilhoite without consideration, claiming it helped manage and sell the property.
- Sims later alleged a 2007 agreement to split sale proceeds, and a 2010 agreement that Sims could live there and be reimbursed for half repair costs.
- Sims paid for storm damage repairs and claimed reimbursement; Wilhoite later sought eviction in 2011 after proposing a buyout that was rejected.
- Sims sued in 2011 seeking declaration that the quitclaim deed was voidable, plus other claims; a jury found no gift, found statutory fraud, and awarded damages, leading to a judgment canceling the deed.
- The trial court’s judgment cancelled the quitclaim deed and awarded Sims damages and attorney’s fees; Wilhoite appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether three-year adverse-possession statute applies | Wilhoite claims adverse possession existed. | Sims disputes adverse possession title. | No adverse possession; statute not triggered |
| Whether oral agreements fell within the statute of frauds | Agreements could be performed within a year and were not for sale of real estate. | Some terms fall under the statute; writing required. | Not within the statute; not for sale of real estate |
| Whether the jury’s statutory-fraud finding requires a contract existence | Contract not required due to non-enforceability under the statute of frauds. | Statutory fraud requires a contract; no contract proven. | Statutory fraud findings preserved; contracts not enforceable under statute |
| Whether title was properly determined via cancellation of a deed rather than trespass to try title | Cancellation of deed is appropriate in fraud context. | Trespass-to-try-title pleading required for title determination. | Cancellation of deed affirmed; no trespass-to-try-title needed |
| Whether damages were properly awarded and consideration of offsets | Damages and fees proper; offsets not warranted; expenditures validated. | Offsets and reasonableness of expenditures not properly proved. | Damages and attorney’s fees affirmed; offset not required; no evidentiary error |
Key Cases Cited
- Kazmir v. Benavides, 288 S.W.3d 557 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009) (defines adverse possession requirements)
- Word v. Box, 3 S.W. 93 (Tex. 1886) (color of title alone insufficient for adverse possession)
- Humble Oil & Ref. Co. v. Parish, 146 S.W.2d 1045 (Tex. Civ. App.—Texarkana 1940) (color of title must be accompanied by actual possession)
- Beverick v. Koch Powers, Inc., 186 S.W.3d 145 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2005) (contract could be performed within a year; no writing required)
- Martin v. Amerman, 133 S.W.3d 262 (Tex. 2004) (trespass-to-try-title requires formal chain of title pleadings)
- Socony Mobil Oil Corp. v. Belveal, 430 S.W.2d 529 (Tex. Civ. App.—El Paso 1968) (illustrates limits of judgments beyond cancellation)
- Dow Chem. Co. v. Francis, 46 S.W.3d 237 (Tex. 2001) (preservation of error required for trial-court comments)