In In re Estate of Maun, a brother sued his sister’s estate for her performance as executrix of their mother’s estate since the late 1980s. No. 13-22-00576-CV, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS 52 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi January 4, 2024, no pet. history). The trial court entered summary judgment for the defendant
The Texas Supreme Court Affirms A Summary Judgment For A Fiduciary Defendant Based On The Statute Of Limitations And The Duty To Use Reasonable Diligence To Discover Claims
The Court noted that a claim generally accrues when the defendant’s wrongful conduct causes the claimant to suffer a legal injury. Id. The Court also noted that the discovery rule can defer accrual of limitations:
In Marcus & Millichap Real Est. Inv. Servs. of Nev. v. Triex Tex. Holdings, LLC, Triex purchased a gas station in 2008 from Hamilton Holdings. No. 21-0913, 2023 Tex. LEXIS 22 (Tex. January 13, 2023) (per curiam). Both the buyer and seller used Marcus & Millichap as their broker for the transaction. In 2012, the operator of the gas station defaulted on the lease. A little over three years later, Triex sued Hamilton Holdings and others for breach of contract, fraud, and related torts. After some discovery, Triex added Marcus & Millichap to the lawsuit in March 2017 and asserted claims for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud by nondisclosure, and conspiracy. Marcus & Millichap moved for summary judgment, arguing that Triex’s claims were time-barred. The trial court granted the motion, and the court of appeals reversed and remanded, concluding that a fact issue existed as to whether Triex “knew or should have known on [December 1, 2012,] that the injury was the result of wrongful acts committed by Marcus & Millichap.” The Texas Supreme Court granted review.
Texas Supreme Court Dismisses Claims By Co-Trustee And Beneficiary Due To Statute Of Limitations And Clarifies That An Unnamed Contingent Beneficiary Can Have Standing To Sue
In Berry v. Berry, one brother sued his other three brothers regarding the leasing of a family ranch. No. 20-0687, 2022 Tex. LEXIS 405 (Tex. May 13, 2022). The family ranch was owned by a limited partnership. The largest limited partner was a trust, and all four brothers were trustees of the trust. A family business, which the plaintiff was no longer an owner of, used the family ranch under an alleged oral lease. The plaintiff alleged that the oral lease was for too long a period and was for inadequate lease payments. The plaintiff filed suit in 2016 and complained about the time period of 2000-2007. The plaintiff sued in his capacity as a co-trustee of the trust and as a beneficiary of the trust. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants based on the statute of limitations. The court of appeals reversed.
Statute of Limitations Barred Estate Representative’s Claim To Void Beneficiary Designations
In Sanders v. Hathaway, the decedent’s estate’s representative sued her sister for various claims arising from the decedent’s beneficiary designation changes, deed transfers, and accounts payable on death changes that benefited the sister. No. 01-18-00661-CV, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 5708 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] July 9, 2019, no pet. history). The sister alleged that the claims were barred by the statute of limitations. The trial court granted summary judgment for the sister, and the representative appealed. The court of appeals first held that limitations had run on the claims:
Court Affirms Summary Judgment For A Trustee Against A Beneficiary Due To The Statute of Limitations And Discusses Constructive Knowledge Of Probate Records
In Gilmore v. Rotan, a testamentary trust’s beneficiaries sued the trustees in 2015 for making a transfer of trust property in 2003 that was evidenced by a deed filed in 2010. No. 11-16-00253-CV, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 7705 (Tex. App.—Eastland September 20, 2018, no pet. history). The beneficiaries claimed
Court Rejects Claim That Mortgage Lender Owed Fiduciary Duties To Borrower And Addressed The Discovery Rule For The Statute of Limitations
In Wakefield v. Bank of Am., N.A., a borrower stopped paying on her mortgage because she felt she was assisting in a fraud. No. 14-16-00580-CV, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 545 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] January 18, 2018, no pet. history). She later sued the lender for breach of fiduciary
To Invoke the Discovery Rule, a Plaintiff Must Have Objectively Verifiable Evidence to Support the Underlying Claim
In Moczygemba v. Moczygemba, a mother sold a ranch to two sons and later sued them for breach of fiduciary duty for not disclosing to her that the deeds also transferred mineral interests. No. 04-14-001100-CV, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 1536 (Tex. App.—San Antonio February 18, 2015, no pet. hist.). The
The Statute of Limitations for Bills of Review in Estate Cases Are Two Years
In Valdez v. Hollenbeck, parties attempted to sue an administrator for thefts from the estate by a third person around 1995 after the court had discharged the administrator in 1996. No. 13-0709, 2015 Tex. LEXIS 556 (Tex. June 12, 2015). The Texas Supreme Court held that all bills of