An owner of property rights is presumed to know the boundaries of its property. Garcia v. Palacios, 667 S.W.2d 225, 231 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1984, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Allen v. Robbins, 347 S.W.2d 362, 366 (Tex. Civ. App.—Austin 1961, no writ); see also City of Anson, 216 S.W.3d at 393 ("The City’s chain of title Establishes that it was on actual notice of plaintiffs' ownership interest."). And the record shows TxDOT had a map at its local office showing the width of its right-of-way easement, which in any event was publicly recorded.
However, Anderson is not persuasive because, there, the evidence presented at trial on the issue of acquiescence was undisputed, and in this case, the evidence is disputed. Other cases cited by Wall, Yates v. Hogstrom, 444 S.W.2d 851 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston [14th Dist.] 1969, no writ); Allen v. Robbins, 347 S.W.2d 362 (Tex.Civ.App. — Austin 1961, no writ), were cases in which the trial court heard conflicting evidence and decided that sufficient evidence was presented to establish adverse possession and acquiescence. No doubt, when a boundary line between adjoining owners is uncertain or controverted, that boundary line may be established by implied agreement, and if the implied agreement is disputed, acquiescence may be shown by circumstantial evidence.
There was evidence at the venue hearing other than that complained of in plaintiffs' third point that was sufficient to support the trial court's venue order. In such a case the presumption referred to is applicable. Allen v. Robbins, 347 S.W.2d 362 (Austin, Tex.Civ.App., 1961, no writ hist.) and Texas P. Ry. Co. v. Empacadora De Ciudad Juarez, S.A., 342 S.W.2d 195 (El Paso, Tex.Civ.App., 1960, ref., n.r.e.). The judgment is affirmed.
It will, therefore, be presumed that the trial court did not consider, but wholly disregarded, any improper evidence which might have been received. Simpson v. Vineyard, Tex.Civ.App., 324 S.W.2d 276; Texas Pacific Ry. Co. v. empacadora De Cuidad Juarez, S. A., Tex.Civ.App., 342 S.W.2d 195, writ ref., n. r. e.; Allen v. Robbins, Tex.Civ.App., 347 S.W.2d 362. Moreover, the objection made to such evidence in the trial court was too general to beconsidered by the court.