Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
the 381st Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas Trial
Court No. DC-09-71 Honorable Jose Luis Garza, Judge Presiding
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
prior appeal, we reversed the trial court's judgment and
remanded this cause to the trial court for further
proceedings in the interest of justice. In the present
appeal, Hugo Alaniz argues the evidence was legally and
factually insufficient to support the trial court's
judgment following remand. We affirm.
Maria Aguirre, Elias Aguirre Jr., Argelio Aguirre, Jose
Guadalupe Aguirre, Merced Aguirre, Mauricia A. Villarreal,
Elsa A. Lara, and Alma Rosa A. Trevino (collectively,
"the Aguirres") brought a trespass to try title
claim against Alaniz. In their petition, the Aguirres claimed
they owned a 0.1530-acre tract of land located in Starr
County, Texas, by adverse possession and that Alaniz had
wrongfully ousted them from the property. Following a bench
trial, the trial court rendered judgment in favor of the
Aguirres, declaring that they had title to the property based
on adverse possession. Alaniz appealed.
Alaniz's first appeal, he complained that (1) the
evidence did not adequately or specifically describe the
property in question, (2) the property description in the
judgment was different from the property alleged in the
petition, and (3) the metes and bounds description contained
in the judgment was never introduced into evidence at trial.
In our opinion, we acknowledged that discrepancies existed
between the property description in the pleadings, the
evidence presented at trial, and the property description in
the judgment. Therefore, we reversed the judgment, and
remanded the cause to the trial court for further proceedings
in the interest of justice. Alaniz v. Aguirre, No.
04-14-00896-CV, 2015 WL 7748521, at *6 (Tex. App.-San Antonio
2015, no pet.). Specifically, we noted that the Aguirres'
petition described the land as:
A tract of land containing 0.1530 of an acre (6, 664 sq. ft.)
out of Share 9-D, Porcion 85, ancient jurisdiction of
Camargo, Mexico, now Starr County, Texas, A. De la Rosa
Original Grantee, Abstract 148.
Id. We further noted that the judgment found that
the Aguirres had title to the following property by adverse
A tract of land containing .02648 OF OE [sic] ACRE (6, 664
Sq.Ft.) out of Share 9-D, Porcion 85, Ancient Jurisdiction of
Camargo, Mexico, now Starr County, Texas, A. De La Rosa,
Original Grantee, Abstract 148 and said 0.2648 of one acre
(11, 534 square feet) also being more particularly described
[metes and bounds description].
Id., at *6-7. We then went on to state:
An award of title to a 0.2648 acre tract of land does not
conform to pleadings alleging ownership of a 0.1530 acre
tract. And, in this case, the judgment is internally
inconsistent first describing the 0.2648 acre tract as
containing 6, 664 square feet, then describing the 0.2648
acre tract as containing 11, 534 square feet.
In addition to the problem with their pleadings, the evidence
presented at trial suffered from similar deficiencies. All of
the deeds introduced to show ownership of the property in
dispute described a 0.1530 acre tract of land. No deed was
introduced into evidence describing a 0.2648 acre tract of
land. In addition, no metes and bounds ...