How Timing Affects Texas Inheritance Claims

How Timing Affects Texas Inheritance Claims

by | Last updated Sep 16, 2024 | Contesting Wills, Contesting wills, How, Inheritance, Time limits

How Timing Affects Texas Inheritance Claims

Imagine discovering that an inheritance promised to you didn’t arrive as expected. This is what happened to the family of Esequiel Palacios Esparza (No. 03-23-00129-CV), leading to a complex legal case about unjust enrichment and legal deadlines.

The Story Behind the Case

Esequiel Palacios Esparza, who passed away in 2013, was the father of 17 children. Before his death, he set up bank accounts in Mexico, known as Payable on Death (P.O.D.) accounts, where money was designated for each of his children after his passing. The children expected to receive the funds after Esequiel’s death, but many felt they had received less than they were entitled to.

Jose Margarito Palacios, one of Esequiel’s sons, had been helping his father manage his banking. After their father’s death, some of the siblings, known as the “Intervenors” in this case, believed they had been shortchanged. They sued both Jose and the bank, claiming something went wrong.

Later, another son, Bonifacio Palacios, filed a lawsuit as the Temporary Dependent Administrator (basically, the person in charge of handling the estate’s legal matters) of Esequiel’s estate. Bonifacio accused Jose of unjust enrichment, which means Jose allegedly gained money unfairly at the expense of the estate. A jury sided with Bonifacio, agreeing that Jose had benefitted inappropriately.

What is Unjust Enrichment?

Unjust enrichment is a legal term used when someone receives a financial benefit they are not entitled to, and it happens without a valid legal reason. Even if there isn’t a contract or written agreement, the person who was wronged can still try to recover what they believe is rightfully theirs. For example, if someone receives money that should have gone to someone else, the wronged person can file an unjust enrichment claim to get that money back.

In this case, Bonifacio claimed that Jose had received more money than he should have, depriving the other siblings of their rightful inheritance.

The Big Legal Question: Timing

One of the key issues in this case was whether the siblings (Intervenors) waited too long to bring their unjust enrichment claim against Jose. In legal terms, this is known as the statute of limitations—basically, a time limit for how long you have to file a lawsuit after a wrong occurs.

How Timing Played a Role in This Case:

  1. Statute of Limitations: In Texas, the law says you have two years to file an unjust enrichment claim. This two-year period starts when the “cause of action” arises, which means when the legal wrong happens, and you have reason to know about it.
  2. When Did the Clock Start? The court decided that the two-year period started when Esequiel passed away in 2013. This is when the Intervenors became entitled to the P.O.D. accounts, and they should have realized if they didn’t receive the correct amounts.
  3. The Discovery Rule: Sometimes, the law allows extra time if the person filing the lawsuit didn’t know—and couldn’t reasonably have known—about the problem right away. This is called the “discovery rule.” However, in this case, the court found that the Intervenors didn’t provide enough evidence to show they only recently discovered the problem with their inheritance. Therefore, the court didn’t allow them to use the discovery rule to extend the time limit.
  4. Missing the Discovery Rule: Because the Intervenors didn’t bring up the discovery rule properly during the trial, the court said they had “waived” the right to use it. This means they lost the chance to argue for more time, and the court ruled that their claim was filed too late.

Key Lessons from This Case

  1. Understanding Unjust Enrichment: If someone has received a financial benefit they aren’t entitled to, a lawsuit for unjust enrichment can help recover the lost money. But, the person filing the lawsuit must prove that the benefit was received at their expense and without a valid reason.
  2. Watch the Clock: Lawsuits come with strict deadlines. In Texas, unjust enrichment claims must be filed within two years from when you should have known about the issue. Missing this deadline could mean losing the right to bring the claim.
  3. Know When You Found Out: If you think you didn’t know about a problem until later, you can try to extend the deadline with the discovery rule. However, you must present this argument clearly and early on in the case, or the court may refuse to consider it.

How Timing Affects Texas Inheritance Claims—In this case, the siblings lost their chance to claim part of the inheritance because they waited too long to file their lawsuit. It serves as a reminder of how crucial timing is when navigating legal disputes. If you ever find yourself in a similar situation, seeking legal advice early can make all the difference in ensuring your rights are protected.

What You Need to Know about the Burden of Proof in Contesting a Will

What You Need to Know about the Burden of Proof in Contesting a Will

by | Last updated Feb 13, 2024 | Contesting Wills, Contesting wills, Grounds, How, Probate, Procedure, Time limits

Will Contest in Texas

In Texas, when someone dies, they may leave behind a will. Sometimes, people may disagree about what the will says or whether it is valid. Then, they may go to court to ask a judge to decide. Who has the burden of proof at this stage can be important.

This is what happened in a case called Castello v. Castello, 03-22-00012-CV. In this case, a man named Frank Castello died in 2018. He had a wife named Cindy and three children from a previous marriage. He also had a will that he made in 2012. In his will, he said that he wanted to give his wife the right to use his property for her life, but after she died, he wanted his children to get everything. He also chose his son Mark to be the executor of his will. The executor is the person who is in charge of carrying out the will.

The Contest in Castello

Cindy contested the will. She said that Frank did not have the mental ability to make a will in 2012. She said that he had a stroke in 2006 and that his condition got worse after that. She said that he could not remember things, recognize people, or make decisions for himself. She also said that she had another will that Frank made in 2009. In that will, he gave her more property and less to his children. Cindy wanted the 2009 will admitted to probate.

Mark said that Frank did have the mental ability to make a will in 2012. He said that he talked to Frank about his wishes and that Frank understood what he was doing. He also said that the will was signed by Frank and two witnesses who said that Frank was of sound mind. He asked the court to admit the 2012 will to probate. Probate is the process of proving that a will is valid and following its instructions. Who had the burden of proof would be important in deciding this case.

Trial Court Decision

The trial court had to decide who was right. The court looked at the evidence that both sides presented. Mark had the 2012 will, the affidavit of the lawyer who drafted the will, and a deed that showed that Frank sold some property in 2012. Cindy had her own affidavit and some parts of the lawyer’s deposition. A deposition is when someone answers questions under oath before the trial.

The trial court ruled that Mark was right. The court said that the 2012 will was valid and that Frank had the mental ability to make it. The court said that Cindy’s evidence was not enough to show that Frank was not capable of making a will. The court admitted the 2012 will to probate and dismissed Cindy’s claim.

The Appeal – Burden of Proof

Cindy was not happy with the court’s decision. She appealed to a higher court. She said that the lower court made a mistake. She said that she did have enough evidence to show that Frank did not have the mental ability to make a will in 2012. She said that the court should have let a jury decide the case.

The higher court agreed with Cindy. The higher court said that Cindy’s evidence did show that there was a question of fact about Frank’s mental ability. A question of fact is something that is not clear, and that needs to be decided by a jury. The higher court said that Cindy’s evidence showed that Frank’s physical and mental health had been declining since his stroke in 2006 and that he had Alzheimer’s disease, memory problems, and confusion. The higher court said that this evidence could be used to show that Frank did not have the mental ability to make a will in 2012. The higher court said that the lower court should not have decided the case by itself. The higher court said that the case should go to a jury trial. A jury trial is when a group of people listen to the evidence and decide who is right.

The higher court reversed the lower court’s decision and sent the case back for a jury trial. The case is not over yet. Cindy and Mark will have to present their evidence to a jury and let them decide who gets what after Frank died.

Burden of Proof

The higher court based its opinion on who had the burden of proof. The proponent, Mark, had the burden of proof if the will was contested before it was admitted to probate. Cindy would have the burden of proof if the will was contested after the will was admitted to probate. Because the will was contested before it was admitted to probate, Mark had the burden of proof. Since Cindy put on some evidence of mental incapacity, the trial court was wrong to grant a summary judgment without a jury trial.

Lesson to be learned

A person thinking about contesting a will needs to act quickly. Cindy contested the will early, before it was admitted to probate, and therefore, Mark had the burden. If Cindy had waited until the will was admitted to probate, she would have the burden of proof to show lack of mental capacity. Her evidence may not have met the burden of proof standard.

Statutory Probate Judges And Why You Want One

Statutory Probate Judges And Why You Want One

by | Last updated Feb 18, 2023 | How, How to probate a case, Probate, Procedure

Statutory Probate Judges

The largest counties in Texas have Statutory Probate Courts. Those courts handle all probate matters in these large counties. The judges of those courts are well-versed in probate law and procedure. If you have a contested probate matter, it would be best to have a Statutory Probate Judge hear your case because of the judge’s experience and training. However, as stated earlier, the Statutory Probate Courts are only in the largest Texas counties.

If you file a contested probate case in a smaller Texas County, you may get a judge who hears criminal, civil, and probate cases. This doesn’t mean that those judges are incompetent in probate matters. It just means that probate matters make up a small part of their docket.

In medium-sized Texas counties, the county will have a County Court At Law. Of course, the judge of the County Court At Law has to be an attorney, but those courts hear all kinds of cases, from criminal to family matters to probate matters. In counties with a County Court At Law, you cannot request that Statutory Probate Judge be assigned to your case.

So, how can you get one to hear your case?

In the smaller Texas counties, the County Judge, who is more like the mayor of the county, hears uncontested probate matters. The County Judge does not need to be an attorney. If the probate case becomes contested, the case is transferred to the District Court, where the judge has to be an attorney. But these judges also hear all kinds of issues, not just probate cases.

In the smaller Texas counties, those without a County Court At Law, you have the ability to have a statutory probate judge hear your contested case. To get a Statutory Probate Judge to hear your case, you must file a motion requesting one at the beginning of the contest. If you wait and the county judge transfers the case to the district judge before your request, you will be heard in the district court. TEC §32.003, In Re Kohleffel, 13-22-00509-CV, (Tex. App. – Edinburg November 18, 2022.)

Learn more about Texas probate here. Find out the types of Texas probate here.

What can go wrong if you represent yourself – part 2

What can go wrong if you represent yourself – part 2

by | Last updated Dec 12, 2020 | Contesting Wills, How

Representing yourself in court

I have written before about what can go wrong when representing yourself in court. Look at this post and this one. The law refers to you as a pro se litigant.

Many people ask about representing themselves in court. They also want to know how to do it. One of the problems with probate matters involving inheritance issues or contesting a will is that the estate is considered a separate person. So while you can represent yourself in court, you can’t represent the interest of the estate. There were two recent cases dealing with pro se litigants and inheritance issues.

The first one involved a man attempting to probate a will and getting appointed as the independent executor as the will specified. Because he wasn’t an attorney, he could represent himself but could not represent the estate so while the judge did admit the will to probate he refused to appoint the man the independent executor of the estate. 13-17-00555-CV.

The second case involved a man dying during an appeal. The man’s attorney withdrew because he couldn’t get the man’s wife to cooperate with him. The wife attempted to represent the estate and filed the appellate brief. The appeals court dismissed the appeal because the wife was not an attorney and therefore could not represent the estate. 08-20-00052-CV.

Can you represent yourself?

Yes. Is it wise, no. And remember, you can’t represent someone else in court and an estate is someone else so you can’t represent an estate in court, only yourself.

Learn the First Step in Contesting a Will in Texas

What Happens When You File An Inheritance Dispute In The Wrong Texas Court

Problems filing in the wrong court

Problems filing in the wrong court

by | Last updated Mar 10, 2025 | How, How to probate a case, Spouses, Who

What happens if you miss-file your claims

When a case or claim is filed in the wrong court, you may lose your claim without being heard. If your case is dismissed after the statute of limitations has run, you are out of luck no matter how good your claim was.

Necessary Disclaimer: Do not take, or refrain from taking, any action based on what you read. You need to discuss your situation with an attorney who can advise you based on your facts.

If you have a question about a pending or anticipated lawsuit about contesting a will in Texas, use the Contact Us page at the top of the site to see if we can help.

Thanks for visiting!

Filing in the wrong court

In a 2020 case, a man died and his family filed his probate case in the probate court. His wife ( a divorce was pending but was not final so she was still his wife) filed an opposition and also filed a tort suit against the other family members in the probate court asserting claims of business disparagement and intentional infliction of emotional distress. (“the tort case”). The other family members filed a motion to dismiss under the Texas Anti-SLAPP law. The probate judge granted the motion to dismiss the tort suit and ordered the wife to pay attorney’s fees to the other family members. The wife appealed. 4-19-00500-CV.

No jurisdiction

In the appeal, the appeals court ruled that the probate court did not have jurisdiction over the tort suit. Because this decision came more than two years after the claims accrued, it was too late for the wife to refile them in a court that did have jurisdiction.

The moral of this case?

If you file in the wrong court you may never get your case decided on the merits.

What can go wrong if you represent yourself – part 1

What can go wrong if you represent yourself – part 1

by | Last updated Dec 16, 2020 | How

Contesting a will in Texas and representing yourself

Representing yourself in a Texas will contest is like operating on yourself. Can you do it? Yes. Is it safe to do it? No.

Necessary Disclaimer: Do not take, or refrain from taking, any action based on what you read. You need to discuss your situation with an attorney who can advise you based on your facts.

If you have a question about a pending or anticipated lawsuit about contesting a will in Texas, use the Contact Us page at the top of the site to see if we can help.

Thanks for visiting!

What can go wrong if you represent yourself

In a 2020 case, a man contested the will of a woman who he claimed was his common-law wife. Texas refers to these marriages as informal marriages.

He was quickly thrown out of court because he represented himself and did not know what he was doing. When reading the case, it seems that he had a good case or at least a case that could have been tried to a jury. But because he was representing himself and did not know what to do, he lost before the case ever got to a jury. The decision of the appeals court is full of examples of things that he failed to do to be able to maintain his claim. The court was not able to do anything but dismiss his case. 07-19-00283-CV, 07-18-00434-CV.

The moral of the story is this: if you represent yourself, the court cannot give you any help. You have to know what is needed and provide it in a timely manner. If you don’t, your case will be dismissed before anyone decides the merits of your case.

Pin It on Pinterest