Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Hattie Lucille Gibson appeals the trial court’s dismissal of her eviction suit for want of jurisdiction. In May 2003, Hattie sued Dynegy Midstream Services LP in the justice court of Young County for forcible entry and detainer and forcible detainer, asserting her right to immediate possession of a two-acre tract of land in Young County. In response, Dynegy filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting that the justice court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Hattie’s claims because they were an attempt to have the court determine ownership or title to the Property. The justice court dismissed Hattie’s suit, and she appealed that ruling to the county court. After a hearing, the county court also dismissed Hattie’s suit for want of jurisdiction. This appeal followed. HOLDING:Affirmed. Construing the language of Texas Property Code �24.007 in accordance with the plain and ordinary meaning of the terms used, the court holds that it is not intended to preclude appellate review of all issues arising from an eviction proceeding involving commercial property, but only to limit review over appeals raising the issue of possession. Because possession is not an issue in this appeal, the court holds that �24.007 does not prevent Hattie from appealing the propriety of the justice and county courts’ orders dismissing her suit for want of subject matter jurisdiction and that the court has appellate jurisdiction over such an appeal. Under the rental agreement, the gas company constructed and installed a natural gas compression, dehydration and storage facility on the property, which Dynegy claimed to own as the gas company’s assignee or successor. Hattie alleged that she first learned in 2001 that the natural gas facility had been constructed and was being maintained on the property. In June of that year, she sent Dynegy the written notice required by statute, demanding that Dynegy vacate the property. Dynegy refused to surrender possession of the property and continued in possession of it without Hattie’s permission. In her forcible detainer claim, Hattie pleaded that, because there was no legally enforceable rental agreement between her and Dynegy, Dynegy occupied the property as a tenant at sufferance. In the alternative, she pleaded that Dynegy was Charles’s tenant and that Charles had acquired possession of the property by forcible entry without legal authority. She alleged that, for either of these reasons, she, as owner of the property, had a superior right to immediate possession of the property. In its defensive pleadings, however, Dynegy asserted that it had acquired title to the property by adverse possession. Dynegy alleged that it had entered the property in 1985, erected a compressor and fence shortly thereafter, and openly, notoriously, and continuously occupied, and evidenced its intent to occupy, the property to the exclusion of all persons. Dynegy further alleged that, if Hattie was not Dynegy’s landlord, as stated in her pleadings, then the principles governing adverse possession claims by tenants against landlords did not apply. Construing the pleadings in the light most favorable to Hattie, the court concludes that the questions of title and possession raised by Dynegy’s allegations of adverse possession are so integrally linked that the justice court could not have decided Hattie’s claims without deciding Dynegy’s title by adverse possession claim. The court holds that the justice and county courts properly granted Dynegy’s plea to the jurisdiction. OPINION:Cayce, C.J.; Cayce, C.J.; Gardner and McCoy, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.