Sign In
Events
Newsletters
Search

Close

Close Search

Cancel

SEARCH
MY LAW.COMNEW

Dyer v. Cotton

In this trespass-to-try-title suit, Eddie Dyer contends that no legally or factually sufficient evidence supports the jury's finding that Dyer had failed to acquire title to the farmland by adverse possession. He further contends that the trial court erred by 1. including a jury instruction requiring Dyer to establish ouster of his other co-tenants to prove adverse possession; 2. allowing evidence of other adverse possession and property dispute suits in which Dyer was involved; and 3.allowing the testimony of a witness whom defendant did not properly disclose during discovery and whose testimony violated the parol evidence rule. Sufficient evidence supports the jury's verdict, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its jury instructions or evidentiary rulings. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Houston's 1st Court of Appeals, No. 01-09-00228-CV, 11-18-2010

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

OPINION

In this trespass to try title suit, Eddie Dyer sued Ronald Cotton, claiming that, in addition to procuring an undivided 1/7th interest to farmland in Grimes County by conveyance, he also had acquired title to the remaining 6/7th interest by adverse possession. A jury disagreed, finding that Dyer had not adversely possessed the property, and the trial court signed a take-nothing judgment against Dyer. On appeal, Dyer contends that no legally or factually sufficient evidence supports the jury’s finding that Dyer had failed to acquire title to the farmland by adverse possession. He further contends that the trial court erred by (1) including a jury instruction requiring Dyer to establish ouster of his other co-tenants to prove adverse possession; (2) allowing evidence of other adverse possession and property dispute lawsuits in which Dyer was involved; and (3) allowing the testimony of a witness whom Cotton did not properly disclose during discovery and whose testimony violated the parol evidence rule. We conclude that sufficient evidence supports the jury’s verdict and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its jury instructions or evidentiary rulings. We therefore affirm.

Trending Stories

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

LEARN MORE

More From ALM

Premium Subscription
With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
View Now
Team Accounts
Our Team Account subscription service is for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
View Now
Bundle Subscriptions
Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both options are priced the same.
View Now
Go to CLE Center
General Counsel Conference Southwest 2024
September 18, 2024 - September 19, 2024
Dallas, TX

Join General Counsel and Senior Legal Leaders at the Premier Forum Designed For and by General Counsel from Fortune 1000 Companies


Learn More
Texas Legal Awards 2024
October 15, 2024
Dallas, TX

The Texas Lawyer honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in Texas.


Learn More
General Counsel Conference Midwest: SuperConference 2025
April 08, 2025 - April 09, 2025
Chicago, IL

Join General Counsel and Senior Legal Leaders at the Premier Forum Designed For and by General Counsel from Fortune 1000 Companies


Learn More
Go to Events Go to Webcasts
Commercial Litigation Income Partner - Pittsburgh, PA

Description: Fox Rothschild has an opening in the Pittsburgh, PA office for an Income Partner- Commercial Litigation, to work with innovativ...


Apply Now ›
Associate Attorney - Commercial Litigation / Bankruptcy - Connecticut

Zeisler & Zeisler, P.C., a highly-regarded corporate restructuring, bankruptcy and commercial litigation boutique, seeks an attorney to ...


Apply Now ›
eDiscovery Analyst II

COLE SCHOTZ P.C.eDISCOVERY ANALYST II- NEW JERSEY OFFICE: Prominent mid-Atlantic law firm with multiple regional office locations seeks an ...


Apply Now ›
Go to Lawjobs
Lawyers of Distinction
06/27/2024
The American Lawyer

Professional Announcement


View Announcement ›
SMGQ Law
06/21/2024
Daily Business Review

Full Page Announcement


View Announcement ›
Blume Forte Fried Zerres & Molinari
06/14/2024
New Jersey Law Journal

Professional Announcement


View Announcement ›
Go to Professional Announcements