Boehl v. Richardson

2 Citing cases

  1. Sanders v. Vaughan

    No. 06-21-00119-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 2, 2022)

    ) (quoting Goodman-Delaney v. Grantham, 484 S.W.3d 171, 174 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2015, no pet.)); see Boehl v. Richardson, No. 13-19-00021-CV, 2019 WL 6769876, at *3 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi Dec. 12, 2019, pet. denied) (mem. op.). Nothing showed that Sanders was ever subject to any landlord-tenant agreement.

  2. Arevalo v. Llamas

    No. 13-20-00497-CV (Tex. App. Aug. 11, 2022)   Cited 2 times
    Stating in dicta the general proposition that an award of attorney’s fees may include appellate attorney's fees but reversing the award under Rule 510.11 for legally insufficient evidence

    District courts have exclusive jurisdiction over title disputes. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 27.031(b)(4); Merit Mgmt. Partners I v. Noelke, 266 S.W.3d 637, 647 (Tex. App.-Austin 2008, no pet.); see also Boehl v. Richardson, No. 13-19-00021-CV, 2019 WL 6769876, at *2 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 12, 2019, pet. denied) (mem. op.). Forcible detainer actions in justice courts may be tried concurrently with title disputes in district court. See Kassim v. Carlisle Ints., Inc., 308 S.W.3d 537, 541 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2010, no pet.); Dormady v. Dinero Land & Cattle Co., 61 S.W.3d 555, 558 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2001, pet. dism'd w.o.j.). Rule 510.3 provides that the court must adjudicate the right to possession and not title.