NO.___________________

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT SAN ANTONIO

IN RE ESTATE OF MARIA L. RAYNES

FROM THE PROBATE COURT NO. 1 OF BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS

RELATOR’S PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND

WRIT OF PROHIBITION

Per Hardy, SBN: 08986500 James E. Hoffman, SBN: 09781750 418 East Park Avenue San Antonio, TX 78212 Phone: (210) 226-8890 Facsimile: (210) 222-1891 perhardylawofc@sbcglobal.net
ATTORNEYS FOR RELATOR Arthur Raynes, Independent Executor

EMERGENCY RELIEF REQUESTED ORAL ARGUMENT IS REQUESTED ACCEPTED 04-15-00615-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 10/1/2015 2:06:54 AM KEITH HOTTLE CLERK 04-15-00615-CVIDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

Rel at or cert ifi es th at th e fo llo w ing is a co m ple te li st of al l pa rti es , at to rn ey s, an d

an y ot he r pe rs on s who ha ve an y i n te res t in th e ou tc om e of th is Pet it io n fo r W rit of Man da m us an d W rit of Pro hi bi ti on reg ard in g th e tri al co ur t’s Fi na l Ju dg m en t en te red

on Aug us t 1 7, 2 01 5.

PARTIES COUNSEL Rela to r: Arth ur Raynes , Per Har dy, SBN: 0 89 86 50 0

In de pe nd en t Ex ecu to r Ja m es E. Hoffm an , SBN: 0 97 81 75 0 41 8 Eas t Pa rk

Aven ue San Ant on io , Texa s 7 82 12 Ph on e: (21 0) 22 6- 88 90 Fax : (2 10 ) 22 2- 18 91 pe rh ard y la wof

c@ sb cg lo ba l.n et
Res po nd en t: Hon or ab le Kell y Cro ss Ju dg e o f Pro ba te Co ur t No . 1 Bex ar Co un ty Cou rth ou se 10 0 Do lo ro sa San Ant on io , Texa s 7 82 05 Ph on e: (21 0) 33 5- 26 70 Fax : (2 10 ) 33 5- 39 98

Rea l Pa rt ie s i n In te re st :

Defen da nt Leah Raynes Cec il Bai n, SB N: 0 15 50 00 0 The Fo ru m , Su ite 600, 80 00 IH 10 W es t San Ant on io , Texa s 7 82 30 Ph on e: (21 0) 34 4- 17 00 Fax : (2 10 ) 34 4- 17 00 ceci lb ai n@ y ah oo .co m
Defen da nt Tod d B art a pr o s e 63 07 Hand so m e Lak e Dr. Leo n Val le y , Texa s 7 82 38
Defen da nt Sam

ue l Ba rta pr o s e

63 07 Hand so m e Lak e Dr. Leo n Val le y , Texa s 7 82 38

- I I

-TABLE OF CONTEN TS

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II
INDEX OF AUT HORITIES.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V
STATEMENT OF TH E CASE.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII
STATEMENT OF JURISDIC TION.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII
RECORD REFERENCES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII
ISSUES PR ESENTED.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX
RELATOR’ S PETITION FOR W RIT OF MANDAMUS AND W RIT OF PROHIB ITION.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A. STATEMENT OF FACTS.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

B. ENTITLEMENT TO MANDAMUS RELIEF.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
C. ARGUMENT AND AU THORITY UNDE R ISSUE NUMB ER 1 The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by d e n y in g th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r’s
co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht to a jury tria l o n m at eri al is su es of f act

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
D. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITY UN DER ISSUE NUMBER 2 The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by l im it in g t he su bjec t o f th e h eari ng s t o th e Req ue st s fo r In

jun ct io n fil ed by th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu tor an d L eah Raynes
an d th e Pet it io n fo r Evi ct i o n fro m th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y fil ed by th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r an d th en en te rin g a Fi na l J ud gm en t o n a ll req ue st s fo r rel ie f..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
E. ARGUMENT AN D AUTHO RITY UNDER ISSUE NUMBER 3 The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s d i s c r e ti on by fin di ng th at a le tt er writ te n by an at to rn ey fo r t h e I n d ep en de nt Exe cu to r on Ju ne 5, 20 13 , of feri ng to se ll th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y was an en fo rcea bl e Co nt ract whe re th e of fer was no t acce pt ed by Leah Raynes an d ne go ti at io ns reg ard in g es se nt ia l te rm s co nt in ue d aft er t ha t d at e..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

- I I I

-F. ARGUMENT AND AU THORITIES UNDER ISSUE NUMBER 4

The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by en te rin g a J u dg m en t fo rci ng th e In de pe nd en t Execu to r to se ll th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y to Leah Raynes fo r an am ou nt well be lo w fai r m ark et va lu e b as ed on a no ne xi st en t Co nt ract

.. . . 16
G. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES UNDE R ISSUE NUMB ER 5 The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by en te rin g a Fi na l Ju dg m en t no t su pp or te d by th e li ve pl ead in gs be fo re th e Co ur t, in cl ud in g th e ap po in tm en t of a rece iv er whi ch was n ot req ue st ed by any pa rty. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
H. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES UNDE R ISSUE NUMB ER 6 The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by de nyin g th e In d e p e nd en t Exe cu to r’s req ue st for

ev ic ti on of Lea h R ay ne s an d he r ad ul t so ns fro m th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y an d in

ju n c t i v e rel ie f to pr ot ect an d pr es erv e th e Est at e of Mar ia L. Raynes

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
PRAYER.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
MANDAMUS CERTIF ICATION.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
CERTIFI CATE OF SERVICE.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
CERTIFI CATE OF COMPLIANCE.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
APPENDIX TO THE PETITION FOR W RIT OF MANDAMUS AND W RIT OF PROHIB ITION.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A
VERIFIC ATION.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A

- I V

-INDEX OF AUT HORITIES

Cas es
Est at e o f Ca si da , 13 S.W .3d . 51 9 (Te x. Ap p.– Bea um on t 2 00 0)

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Est at e o f Eb er li ng

v. Fai r , 54 6 S .W .2d 32 9 (Te x. Ci v. Ap p.– Dall as 19 76 , writ ref'd
n.r.e .)..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 , 16

Gen . Mot or

s C or p. v. Ga yl e , 95 1 S .W .2d 46 9 (Te x. 1 99 7)

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Gue rr a v. Alex an de r , 04 -0 9- 00 00 4- CV (Tex App .—Sa n Ant on io May 26 , 20 10 , no pe t.) (m em . op .)...

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Guz man v. Acun a , 63 5 S .W .2d 31 5 (Te x. Ap p.– San Ant on io 19 83 , pet di sm ’d).

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Hal se ll v. Deho yo s , 81 0 S .W .2d 37 1 (Te x. 1 99 1)

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

In Re Fal li s , No. 04 -0 8- 00 78 1- CV (Tex App .—Sa n Ant o ni o Feb

. 4, 20 09 , no pe t.) (m em . op .). .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

In re M.G.N. , 40 1 S.W .3d 67 7 (Tex .App .–S an Ant on io 20 13 ) , r e v ’ d on ot he r gr ou nd s , 44 1 S .W .3d 24 6 (Te x. 2 01 4)

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

In re Pr ud en ti al

Ins . Co. o f Amer ic a , 14 8 S .W .3d 12 4 (Te x. 2 00 4)

. . . . . . . . . 8, 1 0

Jo hn so n v . Fou rt h C

ou rt of App ea ls , 70 0 S .W .2d 91 6 (Te x. 1 98 5)

.. . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Mer ced es -Ben z C

re di t Co rp . V. R hy ne , 92 5 S .W .2d 66 4 (Te x. 1 99 6)

. . . . . . . . 9, 1 0
Oil Fiel d Ha ul er

s As so c. v. RR Comm’n , 38 1 S .W .2d 18 3 (Te x. 1 96 4)

. . . . . . . . 18

Roma n v . Roma n, 19 3 S .W .3d 40 (Tex .App .–Ho us to n [1 st Dis t.] 20 06 , pet . fil ed ).

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

T.O. St an le

y Boo t Co . v. Ban k o

f El Pas o , 84 7 S .W .2d 21 8 (Te x. 1 99 2)

. . . . . . . 12 , 13 , 16

- V

-Vin cen t v. Ban k of Ameri ca , N.A. , 10 9 S.W .3d 85 6 (Tex

. App

. –Da ll as 20 03 , pe t.

de ni ed )..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

W . E. Grac e Mfg . Co. v. Le vi n , 50 6 S .W .2d 58 0 (Te x.1 97 4)

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

W al ker v. Pack er , 82 7 S .W .2d 83 3 (Te x. 1 99 2)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

W al -Ma rt St or es , In c. v. Lo pe z, 93 S.W .3d 54 8 (Tex .App .–Ho us to n [ 1 4 t h Dis t.] 20 02 , no pe t.)..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Con st itu tio n
Tex . Con st . art . I, § 1 5..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 9

Tex . Con st . art . V, § 6...

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII
Sta tute s
Tex . Bus . & Co m . Cod e § 26 .01

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Tex . Est . Cod e § 35 6.0 02

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 , 17

Tex . Est . Cod e § 40 2.0 02

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Tex . Est . Cod e § 40 2.0 52

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 , 20

Tex . Est . Cod e § 55 .00 2. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Tex . Gov ’t Cod e § 22 .22 1( a), (b )..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII

Rule s
Tex . R. Civ . P. 21 6..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Tex . R. Civ . P. 22 0..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Tex . R. Civ . P. 30 1. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

- V I

-STATEMENT OF TH E CASE

Th e u nd er ly in g p ro ceed in g: R e q u e s t b y t h e I n d e p e n d e n t E x e c u t o r f o r Ev i ct io n an d req ue st by bo th pa rti es fo r an In jun ct i o n

. The Ju ry tri al sc he du le d on th e I n d e p e n d e n t E x e c u t o r ’ s P e t i t i o n f o r Pres erv at io n of th e Est at e, rei m bu rs em en t, da m ag es an d at to rn ey s fees was de ni ed by th e Fi na l J ud gm en t s ig ne d b y th e tr ia l co ur t.
Th e Resp on de nt : T he Re spon de nt is th e Hon or ab le Kell y Cross, Ju dg e of Pro ba te Co ur t No. 1 Bex ar C o u nt y , Tex as

. Ord er fr om wh ic h Rel ie

f i s S ou gh t : F i n a l J u d g men t s i g n e d o n A u g u s t 1 7 , 2 0 1 5 , d e n y i n g A r t h u r R a y n e s , I n d e p e n d e n t Exe cu to r, th e rig ht to a jury tri al o n m at eri al is su es of fact an d or de rin g a fo rced sa le of real pr op ert y fo r an am ou nt far be low m ar ke t va lue ba se d o n a no ne xi st en t co nt ract

.

- V I I

-STATEMENT OF JURISDIC TION

Thi s Co ur t ha s juri sd ic ti on to is su e a W rit of Man da m us an d Pro hi bi ti on un de r
Tex as Co ns ti tu ti on Arti cl e V, § 6, an d u nd er Tex as Gov ern m en t Co de § 22 .22 1( a), (b ).

RECORD REFERENCES

RR 1 - Rep or te r’s Rec or d, Heari ng on Ju ne 16 , 20 15 , at ta ch ed an d th e or ig in al wil l b e fi le d wi th th e Fo ur th Co ur t o f App eal s.
RR 2 - Rep or te r’s Rec or d, Heari ng on Ju ly 22 , 20 15 , at ta ch ed an d th e or ig in al wil l b e fi le d wi th th e Fo ur th Co ur t o f App eal s.
P-Ex - Pet it io ne r’s Exh ib it s
R-Ex - Defen da nt ’s Exh ib it s

- V I I I

-ISSUES PR ESENTED

1. The t r i al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by de nyin g th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r’s
co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht to a jury tria l o n m at eri al is su es of f act

. 2. The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s d is cret io n b y li m it in g t he su bjec t o f th e he ari ng s to th e Req ue st s fo r In

jun ct io n fil ed by the In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r an d Leah Raynes
an d th e Pet it io n fo r Evi ct io n fro m th e Es ta te ’s real pr op ert y fil ed by th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r an d t he n e nt eri ng a Fi na l Ju dg m en t on al l req ue st s fo r rel ie f.

3. Th e t r i a l co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by fin di ng th at a le t t e r w r i t t e n b y a n at to r n e y f

or th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r on Ju ne 5, 20 13 , of feri ng to se ll th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y was an en f or ceab le Co nt ract whe re th e of fer was no t acce pt ed by Leah Raynes an d ne go ti at io ns reg ard in g es se nt ia l te rm s co nt in ue d aft er t ha t d at e.
4. Th e t ria l co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by en te rin g a Ju dg m en t fo rci ng th e In de pe nd en t Execu to r to se ll th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y to Leah Raynes fo r an am ou nt well be lo w fai r m ark et va lu e b as ed on a no ne xi st en t Co nt ract

. 5. The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by en te rin g a Fi na l Ju dg m en t no t su pp or te d by th e li ve pl ead in gs be fo re th e Co ur t, in cl ud in g th e ap po in tm en t of a rece iv er whi ch was n ot req ue st ed by any pa rty.
6. The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret i o n b y d e nyin g th e In de pe nd en t Ex ecu to r’s req ue st fo r ev ic ti on of Leah Raynes an d h er ad ul t s on s fr om th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y an d in

jun ct i v e r e l i e f to pr ot ect an d pr es erv e th e Est at e of Mar ia L. Raynes

.

- I X

-RELATOR’ S PETITION FOR W RIT OF MANDAMUS AND W RIT OF PROHIB ITION

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:
Rel at or , ARTHUR RAYNES, INDEPENDENT EXECUTOR, su b mi t s th is

Pet it io n fo r W rit of Man da m us an d Pro hi bi ti on co m

pl ai ni ng of th e Fi na l Ju dg m en t of
th e Hon or ab le Kell y Cro ss , Ju dg e of th e Pro ba te Co ur t No. 1 of Bex ar Co un ty, Tex as

. Fo r cl a r i t y, Rel at or , Arth ur Raynes , In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r, wil l be refe rred to as
In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r; Res po nd en t, th e Hon or ab le Kell y Cro ss , wil l be refe rred to by

na m e; an d th e Rea l Part ie s in In te res t, Defen da nt s, Leah Raynes , Tod d B a rta an d
Sam ue l Ba rta wil l b e ref

erre d t o b y

na m e.
A. STATEMENT OF FACTS
On Ja nu ary 27 , 20 13 , Mar ia L. Raynes di ed an d le ft a W il l ap po in ti ng Rel at or , Arth ur Raynes , as In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r. (RR 1: 7; Tab 2)

. Leah Raynes is on e of fiv e
h e i r s u nd er th e W il l. (RR 1: 8)

. No on e co nt es te d th e W il l or th e ap po in tm en t o f
Arth ur Raynes as In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r. (RR 1: 8; RR 2: 11 7- 11 8)

. On Ju ly 4, 20 13 , th e tri al co ur t ap pr ov ed th e In ve nt or y , App rai se m en t, an d Lis t of Cl ai m s of th e Est at e
fil ed by the Ind ep en de nt Exec ut or . (RR 1 :8 ).
The m ajor as se t of th e Est at e is th e real pr op ert y lo cat ed at 63 07 Han ds om e
Lak e Dr., Leo n Vall ey , Tex as 78 23 8. (RR 1: 9)

. The Est at e ha s no cas h as se ts an d ha s

- 1

-be en fu nd ed by lo an s fro m th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r an d an ot he r he ir. (RR 2: 1, 90

-

91 ; P- Ex 1 ).
Si nc e Ja nu ary 27 , 20 13 , Le ah Raynes an d he r ad ul t so ns , Tod d Bart a an d
Sam ue l Bart a, ha ve res id ed in th e Han ds om e Lak e pr op ert y wit ho ut pa y in g ren t to th e
Est at e. (RR 1: 21 ; RR 2: 26 , 80 , 11 4

- 1 1 5 )

. Tod d Bart a an d Sam ue l Bart a ha ve no

own ers hi p in te res t in th e pr op ert y an d th ey di d no t pay an y ren t or exp en se s for us e
of th e ho us e. (RR 1: 27 ; RR 2: 10 0, 11 8)

. Si nc e 20 13 , th e Est at e ha s pa id m os t of th e

ex pe ns es for th e h ou se . (P-Ex 1).

In Apr il 20 13 , th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r req ue st ed Leah Raynes an d he r ad ul t

so ns to va cat e th e pr op ert y by May 6, 20 13 , so th at he co ul d li st it fo r sa le

. (RR 1: 9,

11 ; RR 2: 12 2- 12 3)

. In st ead of m ov in g ou t of th e ho us e as req ue s t e d , Leah Raynes
hi red an at to rn ey who ac cu se d the In depe nd en t Exe cu to r of ha ras sm en t. (RR 1: 10 ; RR
2: 10 2- 10 3; RR 2: 12 3- 12 4) . On May 9 , 2 01 3, Leah Raynes ’ at to rn ey se nt a le tt er t o
th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r’s at to r n e y p r o po si ng th at hi s cl ie nt ha ve ex cl us iv e

po ss es si on o f t h e h o u se , bu t th is le tt er di d no t m en ti on pu rch as in g th e ho us e. (RR

1: 33 -3 4; R-Ex 2)

. The In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r di d no t ag ree to al lo w Leah Raynes an d
he r ad ul t so ns to rem ai n in th e ho us e be cau se he wan te d to se ll it in or de r to di st rib ut e
th e p r o c e e d s e qu al ly to al l of th e he irs

. (RR 1: 10 -1 1, 35 , 37 ; RR 2: 88 , 10 2- 10 3)

. On Ju ne 5, 20 13 , th e In de p e n d en t Exe cu to r’s at to rn ey se nt a le tt er to Leah Raynes ’ at to rn ey , off

eri ng to sel l t he ho us e to Leah Raynes “ as is ” fo r $1 21 ,00 0.0 0

- 2

-to cl os e wit hi n 25 da y s or sh e an d he r two ad ul t so ns sh ou ld va cat e th e pr op ert y so it

co ul d be lis te d with a real es ta te ag en t and so ld fo r fai r m ark et va lu e. (RR 1 :1 1, 13 ;
R-Ex 4; Tab 5)

. Leah Raynes reject ed th is of fer, an d aft er 25 da y s th e of fer ex pi red ,

on Ju ne 30 , 20 13 . (RR 1 :1 3; 47 , 60 ; RR 2: 88 ).

In Octo be r 20 13 , Le ah Raynes m ad e he r fir st of fer to pu rch as e th e h o us e fo r $1 22 ,00 0.0 0, whi ch was reject ed by th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r. (RR 1: 14 -1 5, 57 ).
The reaf te r, a se rie s of le tt ers were ex ch an ge d be twee n th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r an d
Leah Raynes ’ rep res en ta ti ve s wit h ne go ti at io ns reg ard in g th e sa le of th e pr op ert y to
he r, in cl ud in g he r of

fers of va rio us pu rch as e pr ic es , bu t no ne of th es e le tt ers ex te nd ed
th e de ad li ne fo r ex pi rat io n of th e of fer in th e Ju ne 5, 20 13 le tt er. (RR 1: 53 -5 4, 76 , 78 ;
RR 2: 20 , 1 0 9- 11 1; R-Ex 35 ; R-Ex 11 ). In hi s res po ns e le tt ers , th e In de pe nd en t
Exe cu to r de m an de d pa y

m en t fo r ex pe ns es an d ren t, bu t di d no t acce pt an y o f th e

pr op os al s fr om

Leah Raynes . (RR 2 :4 -5 , 19 , 63 ).
The In de pe nd en t Exec uto r w ro te “ pr opos ed ” on the Co ntr ac t subm itt ed by Leah Raynes an d he ne ve r si gn ed an y co nt ract to se ll th e ho us e to Leah Raynes

. (RR 1: 75 , 77 ; RR 2: 7, 21 , 25 ; 35 , 10 1; R-Ex 11 ). Si nc e 20 13 , th e In de pe nd en t Exe c u to r an d
Leah Raynes ne ve r reac he d an ag reem en t fo r th e sa le of th e ho us e be cau se th ere was

no ag reed pr ic e, he r of

fers di d no t tre at al l of th e he irs eq ua ll y an d fai rly, and th ere

was no rei m

bu rs em en t to th e Est at e fo r ex pe ns es an d ren ta l va lu e. (RR 1: 17 -1 8; RR
2: 27 -2 8, 9 4- 95 ).

- 3

-Dur in g th is ti m e, Leah Raynes an d he r at to rn ey in te rfer ed wit h the In de pe nd en t

Exe cu to r’s effo rts to m ai nt ai n th e ho us e an d pr ep are it fo r sa le an d accu se d hi m of
ha ras sm en t whe ne ve r he at te m pt ed to ha ve acce ss to th e pr op ert y
. (RR 1: 22 , 24 ; RR
2: 97 , 13 7; RR 2 :9 0, 1 03 , 13 7)

. On Feb ru ary 1 2, 20 15 , t he Ind ep en de nt Exec ut or sen t a “ Ten Day s Not ic e to
Vacat e” by cert ifi ed m ai l to Leah Raynes an d he r ad ul t so ns , bu t th ey di d no t va cat e
th e p ro pe rty. (RR 1: 24 ; RR 2: 83 ; RR 2: 12 7)

. In Feb ru ary 20 15 , th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r no ti fie d Leah Raynes th at he an d

a Rea l Est at e App rai se r wou ld in sp ect th e ho us e on Feb ru ary 23 , 20 15 , bu t th ey were

un ab le to ob ta in acce ss be cau se hi s ke y di d no t wor k an d no on e an swe red th e do or

. (RR 1: 25 -2 6)

. The In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r req ue st ed a ke y fro m Leah Raynes , bu t th at

req ue st was d en ie d. (R R 1 :2 6- 27 ; RR 2: 14 3, 1 46 ).
On Mar ch 12 , 20 15 , th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r fil ed a Pet it io n fo r Pres erv at io n
of th e Est at e, fo r Dam ag es an d Oth er Rel ie f ag ai ns t Defen da nt s Leah Raynes an d he r

two ad ul t s o n s , To d d Bart a an d Sam ue l Bart a. (Tab 6)

. On Mar ch 30 , 20 15 , Leah Raynes fil ed a ve rif

ie d Defen da nt ’s Orig in al Ans wer, Co un te r-Pe ti ti on fo r Rec ov ery
of Pro pe rty of Est at e, Fo r Sal e of Est at e Rea l Pro pe rty, an d fo r Decl arat or y Ju dg m en t,
Tem po rary In jun ct io n an d Fo r Sh ow Cau se Ord er fo r Rem ov al an d de m an de d a jury. (Tab 7)

. On Ap r i l 1 6 , 20 15 , th e Co ur t si gn ed a Doc ke t Co nt ro l Ord er sc he du li ng a jury tri al fo r Octo be r 12 , 20 15

. (Tab 4)

. On Apr il 27 , 20 15 , Leah Raynes pa id th e jury

- 4

-fee. (Tab 3).

On Apr il 24 , 20 15 , a li cen se d real es ta te ap pr ai se r co nd uc te d an in sp ect io n an d

ev al ua ti on of th e ho us e an d de te rm in ed it s va lu e to be $1 51 ,00 0 be cau se of de ferr ed

m ai nt en an ce, whi ch if ad dr es se d wou ld in crea se th e va lu e to $1 61 ,00 0. (RR 2: 61 , 95

- 96 ; P- Ex 2 ).
On May 15 an d 18 , 20 15 , th e ot he r he irs fil ed Affi da vi ts st at in g th ei r su pp or t
of th e In de pe nd en t Ex ecu to r’s effo rts to ev ic t Leah Ray ne s and li st th e pr op ert y fo r

sa le on th e m ark et . (Tab 1 0)

. On May 1 9, 20 15 , Le ah Raynes fil ed a Mo ti on to W it hd raw an d Di sm is s t he App li cat io n fo r Sal e of Pro pe rty an d an Am en de d Ans wer an d Co un te r-Pe ti ti on

. (RR

1: 4; Tab 9 ).
On J un e 1 6, 2 01 5, and Ju ly 22 , 20 15 , he ari ng s were he ld on th e Req ue st s fo r
In jun ct io n fil ed by t h e I n de pe nd en t Exe cu to r an d Leah Raynes an d th e Pet it io n fo r
Evi ct io n fil ed by th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r. (RR 1: 4- 6)

. The Co ur t rep eat ed ly st at ed
th at th os e w e r e t h e o nl y two is su es be fo re th e Co ur t du rin g th es e two he ari ng s an d
th at he ari ng s were “ no t a tri al on th e m eri ts .” (RR 2: 43 -4 4, 77 , 89 -9 0, 10 6, 10 8, 11 2,
13 5, 1 43 , 16 9- 17 0)

. At th es e he ari ng s, Leah Raynes an d he r at to rn ey ad m it te d t h a t t h ere is no
Co nt ract si gn ed by b ot h pa r t i e s , bu t on ly p ro po se d Co nt ract s su bm it te d by h er, bu t

ne ve r “ fin al iz ed .” (RR 1 :5 -6 ; RR 2: 16 5)

.

- 5

-On Aug us t 1 7 , 20 15 , th e Co ur t en te red a Fi na l Ju dg m en t. (Tab 1)

. In th is

Ju dg m en t, th e Co ur t fo un d th at th e le tt er da te d J un e 5, 20 13 , f ro m th e In de pe nd en t
Exe cu to r’s at to rn ey wit h an of fer fo r sa le of th e pr op ert y to Leah Raynes was acce pt ed
b y t h e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r. Bas ed on th is fin di ng , th e Co ur t or de red th e
In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r to se ll th e pr op ert y to Leah Ra yn e s fo r $1 21 ,00 0.0 0 on or
be fo re Octo be r 2, 20 15

. The Co ur t al so m ad e pr ov is io ns fo r ap po in tm en t of a rece iv er

an d m ad e ru lin gs re ga rd in g pa y m en t of ex pe ns es

. The Ju dg m en t de ni ed al l ot he r rel ie f

no t s pe ci fic al ly gran te d.
On Aug us t 20 , 20 15 , th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r fil ed a Req ue st fo r Fi nd in gs of

Fact an d Co nc lu si on s of Law. On Sep te m be r 10 , 20 15 , th e In de pe nde nt E xe cu to r fil ed

a Not ic e o f Pas t Du e Fi nd in gs of F act an d C on cl us io ns of Law.
Und is pu te d a nd Unco nt ro ve rte d F act s
It is un di sp ut ed th at a jury de m an d was m ad e, th e jury fee was pa id , an d th e cas e was set for jury tri al on Octo be r 12 , 20 15 . (TAB 3) ( RR 2 :2 10 , 21 2)

. It i s u nd is pu te d t ha t th e m ajor as se t of the Est at e of Mar ia L. Ray ne s was he r res id en ce l oc at ed at 6 30 7 Han ds om e Lak e Dri ve , San Ant on io , Texa s. (R R 1 : 9 ).

It is un di sp ut ed th at Leah Rayn es an d he r two ad ul t so ns , Sam ue l Bart a an d Tod d Bart a, res id ed wit ho ut pa y in g ren t at 63 07 Han ds om e Lak e Driv e, San Ant on io , Tex as si nc e th e de at h of Mari a L. Raynes on Ja nu ary 27 , 20 13

. (RR 1: 9, 20 , 21 , 25 , 27 ; RR 2: 11 4- 11 5)

. It is un di sp ut ed th at Leah Raynes an d h e r two ad ul t so ns , Sam ue l Bart a an d Tod d Bart a, refu se d to va cat e th e ho us e lo cat ed at 63 07 Han ds om e Lak e Driv e, San Ant on io , Tex as as req ue st ed by th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r. (RR 1: 11 , 24 , 2 9 ; RR 2: 12 3- 12 4, 1 25 , 12 7)

.

- 6

-It is un di sp ut ed th at Sam ue l Bart a an d Tod d Bart a di d no t pa y to th e Est at e an y ren t or an y of th e on go in g ex pe ns es fo r th e ho us e lo cat ed at 63 07 Han ds om e Lak e Dr., Leo n Val le y , Texa s 7 82 38 . (RR 1 :1 :2 0, 2 1, 2 5,2 7; RR 2 :1 35 -1 36 ).

It is un di sp ut ed th at Leah Raynes di d no t pa y to th e Est at e an y ren t an d di d no t pa y m os t of th e on go in g ex pe ns es whi le li vi ng in th e ho us e lo cat ed at 63 07 Han ds om e Lak e Dr., Leo n Vall ey , Tex as 78 23 8. (RR 1: 20 , 21 , 25 , 27 , 38 -4 0; RR 2 : 1 2 8 , 13 3; P-Ex 1)

. It is un co nt ro ve rte d th at th ere is no writ te n Co nt ract of Sal e si gn ed by bo th pa rti es fo r sa le of th e real pr op ert y lo cat ed at 63 07 Han ds om e Lak e Dr., Leo n Vall ey , Tex as 78 23 8 t o Def

en da nt Leah Raynes . (RR 1 :5 -6 , 13 -1 5, 1 8; RR 2 :5 , 16 5)

. B. ENTITLEMENT TO MANDAMUS RELIEF

Man da m us is su es to co rrec t a vi ol at io n of du ty im po se d by la w or a cl ear ab us e
of di sc ret io n whe n th ere is no ad eq ua te rem ed y by ap pe al

. Jo hn so n v. Fou rt h Co ur t of App ea ls , 70 0 S.W .2d 91 6, 91 7 (Tex

. 19 85 ). A tri al co ur t ha s no di sc ret io n in
de te rm in in g wha t th e la w is , or in ap pl y in g th e la w to th e fact s. A fai lu re by th e tri al

co ur t to an al y ze or ap pl y th e la w c o rrec tl y wil l co ns ti tu te an ab us e of di sc ret io n.
W al ker v. Pack er , 82 7 S .W .2d 83 3, 8 40 (Tex . 19 92 ).

In th e Fi na l J ud gm en t, th e tri al co ur t m ad e ru li ng s th at are pr oh ib it ed by
Co ns ti tu ti on al pr ov i s i o n s reg ard in g jury tri al s, du e pr oc es s, Tex as Bu si ne ss &
Co m m erce Co de §§ 26 .01 an d 26 .02 (b ), fu nd am en ta l co nt ract la w reg ard in g th e sa le
of real pr op ert y , an d pr ov is io ns of th e Est at es Co de

. In ad di ti on , th e tri al co ur t fai le d

to co rrec tl y an al y ze or ap pl y th e la w by: (1 ) de nyin g th e rig ht to a jury t r i a l on

m at eri al is su es o f fact ; (2 ) de te rm in in g th at a Co nt ract ex is te d; (3 ) or de rin g th e

- 7

-In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r to se ll th e ho us e fo r an am ou nt be lo w fai r m ark et va lu e to Leah

Raynes ba se d on a no ne xi st en t co nt ract ; (4 ) ap po in ti ng a Rec ei ve r if th e sa l e is no t

co nc lu de d by Octo be r 2, 20 15 ; an d (5 ) ren de rin g a Fi na l Ju dg m en t no t su pp or te d by
th e p le ad in gs

. C. ARGUMENT AND AU THORITY UNDE R ISSUE NUMB ER 1
The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret i o n by de nyin g th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r’s
co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht to a jury tria l o n m at eri al is su es of f act

.

“ The rig ht to jury tri al is o n e o f ou r m os t pr eci ou s rig ht s, ho ld in g ‘a sa cred pl ace in Eng li sh an d Am eri can hi st or y .’ ” Gen

. Mot or s Co rp

. v. Gay le , 95 1 S.W .2d

46 9, 47 6 (Tex

. 19 97 ); Acco rd In re M.G.N. , 40 1 S.W .3d 67 7, 67 9 (Tex .App .–S an
Ant on io 20 13 ), re v’d on ot he r gr ou nd s , 44 1 S.W .3d 24 6 (Tex

. 20 14 ); Acco rd Gue rr a

v. Al exa nd er , 04 -0 9- 00 00 4- CV (Tex App .—Sa n Ant on io May 26 , 20 10 , no pe t.) (m em

. op .). The de ni al of a tri al by jury ha s bee n det erm in ed by th e Tex as Su pr em e
Co ur t to be rev ie wa b l e b y man da m us

. In re Pru de nt ia l In s. Co

. of Ameri ca , 14 8

S.W .3d 12 4, 13 9 (Tex

. 20 04 ) (h ol di ng “ [t]he de ni al of tri al by jury is al so rev ie wab le by m an da m

us .”); Acco rd In R e F

all is , N o. 04- 08- 00781- CV (Tex App .—Sa n Ant on io
Feb . 4, 2 00 9, n o p et .) (m em . op .).
The Texa s C on st it ut io n p ro vi de s th at “ [t]he rig ht of tri al by jury sh al l rem ai n
in vi ol at e.” Tex

. Co ns t. art

. I, § 15

. The Tex as Co ns ti tu ti on an d Tex as Ru le s of Ci vi l

Pro ced ur e req ui re th at whe n a ju r y d e man d ha s be en m ad e an d th e jury fee pa id ,

- 8

-qu es ti on s of fact s m us t be su bm it te d to th e J u ry

. Tex

. Co ns t. art

. I, § 15 ; Tex

. Est

. Co de § 5 5.0 02 ; Tex . R. Civ . P. 21 6 a nd 22 0.

In th e p res en t ca se , Defen da nt Leah Raynes fil ed a jury dem an d a nd pa id th e jury fee. (Tab 3)

. S a mu e l Bart a an d Tod d Bart a al so fil ed a jury de m an ds in th ei r Orig in al Ans wers

. (Tab 8)

. On Apr il 16 , 20 15 , th e Co ur t en te red a Doc ke t C o n t r o l
Ord er sc he du li ng a jury tri al fo r Octo be r 12 , 20 15

. (Tab 4)

. The In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r

was en ti tl ed to rel y on th e jury de m an ds an d pa y m en t of th e jury fee. Tex

. R. Ci v. P.

22 0; Mer ced es -Ben z C

re di t Co rp . V. R hy ne , 92 5 S .W .2d 66 4, 6 66 (Tex . 19 96 ).

On J u n e 1 6, 20 15 , at th e req ue st of th e pa rti es , th e tri al jud ge he ld a he ari ng

on th e In de pe nd en t Ex ecu to r’s Mo ti on for Evi ct io n an d Req ue st fo r In jun ct io n an d
Leah Raynes ’ Req ue st fo r In jun ct io n. Bec au se of ti m e li m it at io ns , th e tri al co ur t

co nt in ue d th e m at te r un ti l Ju ly 2 2, 20 15 , a t whi ch ti m e it c o n c l ud ed th e he ari ng on
th es e m at te rs

. Dur in g th e tw o h e a r in gs on th es e pr el im in ary m at te rs , th e tri al co ur t

rep eat ed ly s ta te d th at on ly t he req ue st s fo r I nju nc ti on an d Evi ct io n were be fo re th e
Co ur t an d t ha t t he ot he r is su es wou ld be de ci de d a t t he jury tri al on th e m eri ts . (RR

1: 4- 6; RR 2: 43 -4 4, 77 , 89 -9 0, 10 6, 10 8, 11 2, 13 5, 14 3, 1 6 9

- 1 7 0 ). Dur in g th es e
he ari ng s, bo t h a t t o rn ey s ack no wled ge d th at da m ag es an d ot he r is su es wou ld be

pr es en te d at th e jury tr ia l. (RR 2 : 21 0, 21 2) . On Ju ly 2 2, 20 15 , i n cl os in g arg um en t,
Leah Raynes at to rn ey st at ed , “ W e’ve go t a jury de m an d. And I be li ev e in an ev ic ti on

su it , si nc e th ere’s no co nt ract , it ’s ei th er go t to be de te rm in ed by su m m ary jud gm en t

- 9

-or be fo re a jury.” (RR 2: 21 0)

. Und er th es e ci rcu m st an ces , th e tri al co ur t m ay no t ta ke

th e cas e fro m th e jury whe re th ere are m at eri al fact is su es o v e r t h e ob jecti on of th e

op po si ng pa rty. Mer ced es -Ben z C re di t Co rp . V. R hy ne , at 6 66 (Tex . 19 96 ).

Nev ert he le ss , on Aug us t 17 , 20 15 , th e tri al co ur t arb it rari ly en te red a Fi na l

Ju dg m en t di sp os in g of al l is su es an d pa rti es

. (Tab 1)

. The In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r was

no t aware th at th e tri al co ur t in te nd ed to rem ov e th e cas e fro m th e jury an d ru le on al l
of th e is su es un ti l h e rec ei ve d t he Fin al Ju dg m en t.
It is well es ta bl is he d th at th e de ni al of tri al by ju r y i s h a rm le ss erro r on ly if

t h e re are no m at eri al fact is su es to su bm it to a jury an d an in st ru ct ed ve rd ic t wou ld
ha ve be en jus ti fie d. In re Pru de nt ia l In s. Co

. of Ameri ca , 14 8 S.W .3d 12 4, 13 8 (Tex

. 20 04 ) ; Hal

se ll v. Deh oy os , 81 0 S.W .2d 37 1, 37 2 (T e x. 19 91 ). The In de pe nd en t
Exe cu to r’s pl ead in gs pr es en t se ve ral cau se s of act io n an d req ue st s fo r da m ag es th at

co nt ai n m at eri al is su es of fact to be su bm it te d to th e jury. Hal se ll at 37 2 (Tex

. 19 91 ).

In th e pr es en t case , th e fo ll owi ng m at eri al fact is su es were req ui red to be su bm it te d

to th e jury: (1 ) th e ex is te nc e of a co nt ract fo r sa le of th e real pr op ert y if no t de te rm in ed by S u mm a r y J u dg m en t; (2 ) th e fai r m ark et va lu e of th e ho us e; (3 ) th e am ou nt of
da m ag es to the E stat e cau se d by Defen da nt s’ fai lu re to pr op erl y m ai nt ai n the pr ope rt y ; (4 ) rei m bu rs em en ts fo r ren ta l va lu e an d ex pe ns es fro m Defen da nt s fo r th e m or e th an

two y ears th ey oc cu pi ed th e Han ds ome La k e Dr. pr op ert y wit ho ut co ns en t of th e
In de pe nd en t Ex ecu to r an d o th er hei rs ; (5) frau d by Leah Raynes ag ai ns t t he Est at e;

- 1 0

-an d (6 ) th e award of a tt or ne y s fe es to th e Est at e.

The Fi na l Ju dg m en t en te red on Aug us t 17 , 20 15 , arb it rar i l y d e ni ed th e
In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r’s rig ht to a jury tri al on th e m at eri al is su es of fact

. In de pr iv in g
th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r of th e co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht to a jury tri al on th es e is su es , th e
tri al co ur t cl earl y

ab us ed it s d is cret io n.
D. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITY UN DER ISSUE NUMBER 2
Th e t r ia l co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by li m it in g th e su bjec t of th e he ari ng s to t h e Req ue st s fo r In

jun ct io n fil ed by th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r an d Leah Raynes an d th e Pet it io n fo r Evi ct io n fro m th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y fil ed by th e In de pe nd en t E xe cu to r an d t he n e nt eri ng a Fi na l J ud gm en t o n a ll req ue st s fo r rel ie f.
Th e tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by en te rin g a Fi na l Ju dg m en t whi ch
di sp os ed of al l is su es aft er li m it in g th e sc op e of two he ari ng s on Ju ne 16 , 20 15 , an d

Ju ly 22 , 20 15 , to on ly th ree is su es : (1 ) th e ev ic ti on of Leah Raynes , Sam ue l Bart a, an d
Tod d B art a; (2) th e In de pe nd en t Ex ecu to r’s req ue st fo r an in jun ct io n; an d (3 ) Leah Raynes ’ req ue st fo r an in

jun ct io n. (RR: 1: 4- 6)

. The tri al co ur t rep eat ed ly co nf irmed
th at th e req ue st s fo r an in jun ct io n and th e req ue st for an ev ic ti on were t he on ly two
is su es be fo re th e co ur t an d th at th e he ari ng s were no t a “ tri al on th e m eri ts .” (RR 1: 4- 6; RR 2: 1, 43 -4 4, 77 , 89 -9 0, 10 6, 10 8, 11 2, 13 5 , 1 4 3 , 16 9- 17 0)

. The In de pe nd en t
Exe cu to r rel ie d up on th e co ur t’s dir ec ti ve to co nf in e th e ev id en ce an d te st im on y to th e

ne ed for an ev ic ti on an d i nju nc ti on . (RR 1 :6 ; RR 2: 89 -9 0, 1 49 , 19 5- 19 6)

. B e c a u s e t he tri al co ur t ru le d on al l is su es in th e Fi na l Ju dg m en t, th e

- 1 1

-In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r, on be ha lf of th e Est at e, was de ni ed du e pr oc es s to pr es en t hi s

ev id en ce o n a ll th e is su es at two he ari ng s. Fu rth er, t he reco rd for an y ap pe al in th is

cas e is in co m

pl et e an d in ad eq ua te be cau se th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r was no t al lo wed

t o p res en t hi s en ti re cas e an d wit ne ss es at th e jury tri al whi ch was sc he du l e d f o r
Octo be r 12 , 20 15

. E. ARGUMENT AN D AUTHO RITY UNDER ISSUE NUMBER 3
The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by fin di ng th at a le tt er writ te n by an at to rn ey fo r th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r on Ju ne 5, 20 13 , of feri ng to se ll th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y was an en fo rcea bl e Co nt ract whe re th e of fer was no t acce pt ed by Leah Raynes an d
ne go ti at io ns reg ard in g e ss en ti al ter m s co nt in ue d a fte r th at da te

. Mu tu al as se nt co nc ern in g m at eri al te rm s is a pr ereq ui si te to th e fo rm at io n of a
bi nd in g, en fo rcea bl e co nt ract

. T.O. St an le y Boo t Co

. v. Ban k of

El Pas o , 84 7 S.W .2d

21 8, 22 1 (Tex

. 19 92 ) (wh ere es se nt ia l te rm is op en fo r fu tu re ne go ti at io n, no bi nd in g

co nt ract ex is ts ). To fo rm a bi nd in g co nt ract , th e fo ll owi ng el em en ts m us t be pr es en t: (1 ) an off er; (2) an acce pt an ce i n st ric t com pl ia nc e wit h th e te rm s of the of fer; (3) a

m eet in g of th e m in ds ; (4 ) each pa rty's co ns en t t o th e te rm s; an d (5 ) ex ecu ti on an d
de li ve ry of th e co nt ract wit h th e in te n t t ha t it be m ut ua l an d bi nd in g. Roma n v.
Ro m a n, 19 3 S.W .3d 40 , 50 (Tex .App .–Ho us to n [1 st Dis t.] 20 06 , pe t. fil ed ); c i t i n g
W al -Ma rt St o r e s , I

n c. v. Lo pe z, 93 S.W .3d 54 8, 55 5- 56 (Tex .App .–Ho us to n [1 4t h
Dis t.] 20 02 , no pe t.).

A Co nt ract fo r sa le of real pr op ert y m us t be in writ in g an d si gn ed by th e pe rs on

- 1 2

-to be ch arg ed wit h th e pr om is e or a g r e e men t or by s om eo ne la wfu ll y au th or iz ed to

si gn fo r hi m

. Tex

. Bu s. & Co m

. Co de § 26 .01

. The writ te n Co nt ract m us t co nt ai n al l
materi al an d es se nt ia l te rm s of th e ag reem en t. T.O. St an le y Boo t Co

. at 22 1

. Th e 1

In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r ne ve r si gn ed a co nt ract to se ll th e ho us e to Leah Raynes

. (RR

2: 7)

. At th e he ari ng s on Ju ne 16 , 20 15 , an d Ju ly 22 , 20 15 , Leah Raynes an d he r

at to rn ey ad m it te d th at th ere is no Co nt ract si gn ed by bo th pa rti es , bu t on ly pr op os ed
Co nt ract s su bm it te d by he r. (RR 1: 5- 6; RR 2: 16 5)

. In res po ns e to a qu es ti on fro m th e
tri al co ur t rega rd in g whet he r th ere i s wri tt en do cu m en ta ti on of a n agr eem en t to se ll
th e pr op ert y to Leah Raynes , he r at to r n e y r e p l ie d, “ No. The re is no act ua l writ te n

co nt ract , th at ’s cor rect .” (RR 1 :5 -6 ).
On Ju ne 5, 20 13 , th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r’s pr ev io us at to rn ey se nt a le tt er to
Leah Rayne s ’ a t to rn ey of feri ng to se ll th e ho us e to Leah Raynes “ as is ” fo r $1 21 ,00 0.0 0 to cl os e wit hi n 25 da y s or sh e was to va cat e th e pr op ert y wit hi n 25 da y s,

pa y fo r al l ut il it ie s/ bi ll s in cu rred on he r be ha lf an d he r two ad ul t ch il dr en li vi ng th ere,

an d “ no lo ng er hi nd er th e sa le of su ch pr op ert y th at wil l be un de r co nt ract wit h a real

es ta te ag en t an d s ol d fo r fai r m ark et va lu e.” (RR 1: 11 ; R- Ex 4 , Tab 5 ).
Leah Raynes di d no t acce pt th is pr op os al an d it ex pi red 25 da y s la te r on Ju ne

D u r i n g t h e h e a r i n g o n J u n e 1 6 , 2 0 1 5 , J u d g e K e l l y s e e m e d t o r e c o g n i z e t h e s e r e q u i r e m e n t s 1

w h e n s h e a s k e d L e a h R a y n e s ’ a t t o r n e y, “ If t h e r e i s n o w r i t t e n a g r e e m e n t t h a t w a s s i g n e d b y b o t h s i d e s , w h y a r e y o u w a s t i n g a l l o f o u r t i m e ? D o y o u h a v e a l e t t e r w h e r e y o u h a v e m a d e a n o f f e r a n d t h e y h a v e a c c e p t e d ? I a s k e d y o u a b o u t t h e J u n e 5 2 0 1 3 a g r e e m e n t t o s e l l t h e h o u s e f o r 1 2 1 , 0 0 0 a s w h a t w a s i n t h y o u r p l e a d i n g

. A n d y o u s a i d t h e r e w a s n o w r i t t e n a g r e e m e n t , r i g h t ? ” ( R R 1 : 3 3 )

.

- 1 3

-30 , 20 14

. (RR 1: 13 , 60 ; RR 2: 88 ). D u r in g th e he ari ng on Ju ne 16 , 20 15 , th e tri al

co ur t ack no wled ge d th at th e Defen da nt Leah Raynes “ di dn ’t do he r pa rt” in res po ns e

to th e o ffer in th e le tt er dat ed Ju ne 5, 20 13

. (RR 1: 49 ). In th is reg ard , th e tr ia l co ur t

st at ed , “ Now, it do es no t lo ok —ca us e it ’s Ju ne 20 15 –t ha t, A, y ou r cl ie nt bo ug ht th is

pr op ert y ; an d B, it do es no t lo ok li ke th is of fer was acce pt ed be cau se th e te rm s were

no t co m pl et ed ...it do es no t lo ok li ke y ou r cl ie nt acce pt ed an d di d he r pa rt.” (RR 1: 49

- 50 ). The refo re, th e Fi na l Ju dg m en t fin di ng th at th e Ju ne 5, 20 13 le tt er was a Co nt ract

was no t s up po rte d b y

th e tr ia l co ur t’s o wn as se ss m en t o f th e ev id en ce.
Afte r th e of

fer in th e Ju ne 5, 20 13 le tt er was no t a c c e p t e d, th e In de pe nd en t
Exe cu to r di d no t m ak e an y ot he r pr op os al s t o s el l t he pr op ert y to Leah Raynes (RR

1: 17 , 50 -5 2) , bu t a se rie s of le tte rs w ere ex ch an ge d be twee n th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r

an d h e r a t t o r ne y wit h ne go ti at io ns reg ard in g th e sa le of th e pr op ert y to he r. In hi s
le tt ers to Leah Raynes ’ at to rn ey , th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r de m an de d pa y m en t to th e
Est at e fo r ex p e n s e s a n d ren t, bu t ne ve r ag reed to ex te nd th e de ad li ne fo r th e of fer

co nt ai ne d in th e Ju ne 5, 20 13 le tt er an d ne ve r ag reed to a pr ic e fo r th e sa le of th e
ho us e. (RR 1: 18 , 53 ; RR 2: 4- 5, 19 , 94 -9 5)

. Neg ot ia ti on s do no t co ns ti tu te ag reem en t.
Co ns id er Est at e of

Eber li ng v. Fai r , 54 6 S .W .2d 32 9 (Te x. Ci v. Ap p.– Dall as 19 76 , writ re f' d n. r. e. ) (h ol di ng fo ur le tt ers no t a bi nd in g co nt ract be cau se es se nt ia l te rm s no t

ag reed an d le tt ers di d no t sa ti sf y th e St at ut e of Frau ds an d Tex

. Bu s. & Co m m

. Co de

Ann

. § 26 .01 (b )(4 )). Eve n th ou gh th e pa rti es en ga g e d i n ne go ti at io ns , th ey ne ve r

- 1 4

-reac he d ag reem en t on th e es se nt ia l te rm s, in cl ud in g pr ic e, of th i s r e a l es ta te

tra ns act io n a nd “ th us ne ve r co nc lu de d a n a gr eem en t.” Id at 3 31

. Mu tu al as se nt or ag reem en t is th e es se nc e of a co nt ract

. W

. E. Gra ce Mfg

. Co

.

v. Levi n , 50 6 S.W .2d 58 0, 58 4 (Tex .19 74 ). The re was ob vi ou sl y no m ut ua l ag reem en t
in th is cas e. Afte r th e Ju ne 20 13 de ad li ne ex pi red , Leah Raynes m ad e se ve ral of fers

to pu rch as e th e pr op ert y fo r pr ic es ran gi ng fro m $1 16 ,00 0 to $1 30 ,00 0, bu t no ne of
th es e of fers were acce pt ed by th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r. (RR 1: 78 , 81 ; RR 2: 20 , 25 , 63 , 94 -9 5, 10 9- 11 1; R-Ex 11 ; R-Ex 35 ). Leah Raynes ’ fir st of f e r t o p u r ch as e th e
ho us e was m ad e in Octo be r 20 13 , th ree m on th s af te r th e Ju ne 5 of

fer h ad ex pi red

. th

Su bs eq ue nt ly, sh e m ad e se ve ral ad di ti on al of fers , a ll of whi ch were reject ed by t he

In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r. (RR 1: 14 -1 5; 16 , 57 ; RR 2: 63 -6 4, 94 -9 5, 10 9- 11 1)

. So m e of
th e pr op os al s were “ as is ” an d ot he rs co nt ai ne d sp eci al pr ov is io ns

. (RR 2: 42 -4 3, 45 ).

At th e he ari ng on Ju ly 2 2, 20 15 , Le ah Raynes te st ifi ed th at he r p r op os ed Co nt ract s

were n ev er “ fin al iz ed .” (RR 2 :1 65 ).
The Ju ne 5, 2 01 3 l et te r is no t an en fo rcea bl e Co nt ract be cau se :
1. Leah Raynes di d no t co ns en t to th e in it ia l te rm s pr op os ed by th e at to rn ey fo r th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r in th e Ju ne 5, 20 13 le tt er, bu t su bs eq ue nt ly reject ed th at pr op os al an d in st ead m ad e ot he r of fers to pu rch as e th e pr op ert y w h i ch were no t acce pt ed

. (RR 1: 13 ; RR 2: 20 , 21 , 25 , 94 -9 5, 10 9- 11 1)

. 2. The re was cl earl y no m eet in g of th e mi nd s or m ut ua l as se nt

. Neg ot ia ti on s reg ard in g es se nt ia l te rm s of th e s a le , in cl ud in g pr ic e, co nt in ue d aft er th e pr op os al in th e Ju ne 5, 20 13 le tt er was no t acce pt ed

- 1 5

-by th e de ad li ne on Ju ne 30 , 20 13

. Est at e of Ebe rl in g at 33 1; T.O. St an le y Boo t Co

. at 22 1. (R R 2 :2 5)

3. It is un co nt ro ve rte d th at th ere no writ te n Co nt ract si gn ed by th e pa rti es fo r sa le of t he real pro pe rty to De fen da nt Leah Raynes . (RR 1 :5 -6 ).
The tri al co ur t can no t th wart th e m an da to ry req ui rem en ts fo r a writ te n Co nt ract
fo r th e sa le of real pr op ert y by de cl ari ng th at th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r acce pt ed hi s

own of fer co nt ai ne d in th e le tt er fro m hi s at to rn ey da te d Ju ne 5, 20 13

. (Tab 1)

. Co ur ts

can no t m ak e co nt ract s fo r th e pa rti es

. Guz man v. Acu na , 63 5 S.W .2d 31 5, 31 9 (Tex

. App .–S an Ant on io 19 83 , pe t di sm ’d); cit in g Est at e of Ebe rl in g v. Fai r , 54 6 S.W .2d

32 9, 3 34 (Tex . Civ . App .–Dal la s 1 97 6, wri t re f'd n.r.e .).
F. ARGUMENT AND AU THORITIES UNDER ISSUE NUMBER 4
The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by en te rin g a Ju dg m en t fo rci ng th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r to se ll th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y to Leah Raynes fo r an am ou nt well be lo w fai r m ark et va lu e b as ed on a no ne xi st en t Co nt ract

. The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by o rd eri ng th e In de pe nd en t Ex ecu to r to

se ll th e ho us e to Leah Raynes fo r $1 21 ,00 0, whi ch is be lo w th e a p p r ai se d va lu e of
$1 51 ,00 0. (R R 2 :9 6; P-Ex 2).
The tri al co ur t di d no t h a v e a u t h o r it y to or de r th e sa le of th e real pr op ert y to
Leah Raynes be cau se th e sa le is no t au th or iz ed by st at ut e or a co nt ract ua l ag reem en t
of th e p art ie s. Tex . Est . Cod e § 35 6.0 02 ; s ee Se ct io n E, su pr a
. The W il l in th is cas e was ad m it te d to Pro ba t e a n d n o C on te st was fil ed . ( RR
1: 8; RR 2: 11 7- 11 8)

. The W il l gr an te d th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r fu ll a u t h o rit y to

- 1 6

-ad m in is te r th e es ta te , in cl ud in g “ th e po wer to se ll , m an ag e, ha nd le , tra de , ex ch an ge ,

m or tg ag e, in ve st , rei nv es t, pl ed ge , tra ns fer or as si gn al l pr op ert y : real , pe rs on al , or

m ix ed on su ch te rm s an d fo r su ch co ns id erat io n as m y Exe cu to r m ay se e fit ...” (TAB 2)

. The refo re, th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r was au th or iz e d to se ll th e real pr op ert y in
wha te ve r m an ne r he de em ed wou ld be in th e be st in te res t of th e Est at e. Tex

. Est

. Co de § 35 6.0 02 . I n th is cas e, th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r de te rm in ed th at li st in g th e ho us e

on th e m ark et to ob ta in th e hi gh es t pr ic e was in th e be st in te res t of the Est at e an d in
he r te st im on y , Leah Raynes ag reed . (RR 2 :1 01 , 16 2)

.

“ If a W il l au th or iz es th e ex ecu to r to se ll th e te st at or ’s pr op ert y : (1 ) A co ur t

or de r is no t re qu ire d t o a ut ho riz e th e ex ecu to r to sel l th e pr op ert y , (2 ) The ex ecu to r

m ay se ll th e pr op ert y : A. at pu bl ic au ct io n or pr iv at el y as th e ex ecu to r co ns id ers to be
in th e be st in te res t of th e es ta te ; an d B. Fo r cas h or on cred it te rm s de te rm in ed by th e

ex ecu to r.” Tex . Est . Cod e § 35 6.0 02

. A s I nd ep en de nt Exe cu to r wit h fu ll un li m it ed po wers , Arth ur Raynes ha s th e

au th or it y to li st an d se ll th e real pr op ert y lo cat ed at 63 07 Han ds om e Lak e Dr., Leo n
Vall ey , Tex as 78 23 8 fo r fai r m ark et va lu e to a wil li ng bu y er wit ho ut co ur t ap pr ov al

. Tex . Est . Cod e § § 3 56 .00 2, 4 02 .00 2 a nd 40 2.0 52

. The refo re, th e tri al co ur t ex ceed ed it s au th or it y an d a b u s ed it s di sc ret io n by

or deri ng th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r to se ll th e pr op ert y to Leah Raynes at a pr ic e be low
fai r m ark et va lu e.

- 1 7

-G. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES UNDE R ISSUE NUMB ER 5

The tri al co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by en te rin g a Fi na l Ju dg m en t no t su pp or te d by th e li ve ple ad ing s be fo re the Co ur t, in cl ud in g th e ap po in tm en t of a rece iv er whi ch was no t req ue st ed by any

pa rty.
The re were no li ve pl ead in gs t o s u p p o rt th e tri al co ur t’s Fi na l Ju dg m en t

or de rin g a fo rced sa le of th e ho us e. Pri or to th e he ari ng s, Leah Raynes ’ at to rn ey ha d
wit hd rawn he r pl ead in gs th at req ue st ed a c o u r t

- o r de red sa le of th e ho us e. (RR 1: 4;
Tab 9)

. “ A pa rty m ay no t ob ta in a jud gm en t ba se d on a th eo ry no t pl ead .” Vin cen t v.
Ban k of Ameri ca , N.A. , 10 9 S.W .3d 85 6, 86 3 (Tex

. App

. –Da ll as 20 03 , pe t. de ni ed ).

Tex

. R. Ci v. P. 30 1. A jud gm en t no t su pp or te d by pl ead in gs m us t be rev ers ed

. Vin cen t

at 86 3, ci ti ng Oil Fiel d Hau le rs Ass oc

. v. RR Co mm’ n , 3 8 1 S

. W.2d 18 3, 19 1 (Tex

. 19 64 ).
The ap po in tm en t of a rece iv er was no t requ es te d by an y pa rty or di sc us se d at
th e h eari ng s o n J un e 1 6, 2 01 5, an d J ul y 22 , 20 15

. H. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES UNDE R ISSUE NUMB ER 6
The tri al co ur t abu se d it s d is cret io n b y de nyin g t he Ind ep en de nt Exec ut or ’s req ue st fo r ev i c t i o n o f Leah Raynes an d he r ad ul t so ns fro m th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y an d in jun ct iv e rel ie f to pro te ct an d p res erv e th e Est at e o f Mar ia L. Ray ne s.
As so on as th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r or an y of th e ot he r Dev is ees ob jecte d to
Leah Raynes ’ oc cu pa nc y of th e pr op ert y , sh e no lo ng er ha d a rig ht to co nt in ue li vi ng
th ere an d sh ou ld ha ve be en ev ic te d. Est at e of Ca si da , 13 S.W .3d

. 51 9, 52 3, 52 5 (Tex

. App .–B eau m on t 2 00 0)

.

- 1 8

-In Apr il 20 13 , th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r req ue st ed Leah Raynes an d he r ad ul t

so ns to va cat e th e pr op ert y by May 6, 20 13 , so th at he co ul d li st it fo r sa le

. (RR 1: 9,

11 -1 3; RR 2: 12 2- 12 3)

. In st ead of m ov in g ou t of th e ho us e as req ue st ed , Leah Raynes
hir ed an atto rn ey who accu se d th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r of ha ras sm en t. (RR 1:10; RR
2: 10 2- 10 3; RR 2: 12 3- 12 4)

. The In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r d i d no t acce pt th e pr op os al
fro m Leah Raynes ’ at to rn ey m ad e in May 20 13 th at sh e ha ve ex cl us iv e po ss es si on of
th e ho us e be cau se he in te nd ed to se ll th e pr op ert y in or de r to di st rib ut e th e pr oc eed s

to th e he irs eq ua ll y
. (RR 1: 10 -1 1; RR 2: 10 2- 10 3)

. Pri o r t o f i li ng th is la wsu it , th e
In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r ha d req ue st ed th at Leah Raynes an d he r ad ul t so ns va cat e th e
ho us e on th ree di ffer en t oc cas io ns , bu t th ey refu se d. (RR 2: 87 , 10 2)

. The In de pe nd en t
Exe cu to r no ti fie d th e ot he r he irs of th is req u e s t

. (RR 1: 9- 10 ). On May 15 an d 18 , 20 15 , th e ot he r he irs fil ed swo rn Affi da vi ts st at in g th ei r su pp or t of the In de pe nd en t
Exe cu to rs ’s effo rts to ev ic t Lea h R ay ne s an d h er ad ul t s on s. (Tab 10 ).

As a res ul t of Leah Raynes an d h e r so ns ’ fai lu re to va cat e th e pr em is es , th e
Est at e su ffer ed lo ss of ren ta l in co m e be twee n $1 ,36 0 an d $1 ,40 0 pe r m on th (RR 1: 45 ;
RR 2: 99 ; P-Ex 2) an d da m ag es fo r de ferr ed m ai nt en an ce be cau se of th e f a il ur e to

m ai nt ai n t he pro pe rty. (RR 2: 90 ). The In de pe nd en t Execu to r req ue st ed th e ev ic ti on

an d In jun ct io n to pr es erv e th e Est at e an d pr ev en t fu rth er da m ag es an d lo s se s. (RR

1: 28 -2 9; RR 2 :9 0)

. As In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r wit h fu ll au th or it y , Arth ur Raynes ha s t h e rig ht to

- 1 9

-acce ss an d th e ex cl us iv e po ss es si on of th e pr op ert y in or de r to carr y ou t hi s du ti es to

pr es erv e, main ta in , an d se ll th e pr op ert y at th e be st pr ic e fo r di st rib ut io n to th e
Dev is ees . Tex. Es t. Co de §4 02 .05 2.
The refo re, th e t r i a l c ou rt ex ceed ed it s au th or it y an d ab us ed it s di sc ret io n by
de nyin g th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r’s req ue st fo r ev ic ti on of Leah Raynes an d he r ad ul t

so ns fro m th e Est at e’s real pr op ert y an d in jun ct iv e rel ie f to pr ot ect an d pr es erv e th e
Est at e o f Mar ia L. Ray ne s.
PRAYER

Fo r th es e reas on s th e In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r req ue st s th is Co ur t to gr an t a W rit
of Man da m

us to Ju dg e Kell y Cro ss , Ju dg e of th e Pro ba te Co ur t No. 1 of Bex ar
Co un ty, Tex as , req ui rin g he r to va cat e th e Fi na l Ju dg m en t an d to gr an t a W rit of

Pro hi bi ti on to pr ecl ud e an y fu rth er act io n by th e tri al co ur t reg ard in g th e sa le of th e
h o u se un ti l th e cas e is pr es en te d to a jury. The In de pe nd en t Exe cu to r req ue s t s t h i s
Co ur t t o i ss ue an in

jun ct io n fo r th e p ro te ct io n o f th e p ro pe rty of t he Est at e.

Res pe ct fu ll y

su bm it te d,

/s / 

## Per Hardy
Per Har dy, SBN: 0 89 86 50 0 Ja m es E. Hoffm an , SBN: 0 97 81 75 0 41 8 Eas t Pa rk

Aven ue San Ant on io , TX 782 12 Ph on e: (21 0) 22 6- 88 90 Facs im il e: (21 0) 22 2- 18 91 pe rh ard y la wof

c@ sb cg lo ba l.n et

- 2 0

-MANDAMUS CERTIF ICATION

Pu rs ua nt to Tex as Ru le of App el la te Pro ced ur e 52 .3(j), I cert ify th at I ha ve rev ie wed th is Pet it io n an d th at ev ery fact ua l st at em en t in th e Pet it io n is su pp or te d by co m pe te nt ev id en ce in cl ud ed in th e ap pe nd ix or reco rd

. Pu rs ua nt to Ru le 52 .3(k )(l )(A), I cert ify th at ev ery do cu m en t co nt ai ne d i n t he ap pe nd ix is a tr ue an d c or rect co py.

/s / 

## Per Hardy PER HARDY Att or ne y for Rel at or Arth ur Raynes

CERTIFI CATE OF SERVICE

I he reb y cer t i fy th at a tru e an d co rrec t co py of th e Pet it io n fo r W rit of Man da m us fil ed on Octo be r 1, 2 0 1 5 , h a s be en se rv ed on Octo be r 1, 20 15 , to th e fo ll owi ng :
1. Ju dg e Kel ly Cros s, J ud ge of t he Pro ba te Co ur t No. 1, Bex ar Co un ty Co ur t Hou se , 10 0 Do lo ro sa , San Ant on io , Texa s 7 82 05 ;
2.C eci l Bai n, Att or ne y fo r Defen da nt Leah Raynes , The Fo ru m , S u i te 60 0, 80 00 IH 10 W es t, Sa n An to ni o, Tex as 78 23 0, ceci lb ai n@ y ah oo .co m
3. Defen da nt Tod d Bart a, pr o se , 63 07 Han ds o me La ke Dr., Leo n Vall ey , Tex as 78 23 8

4. Defen da nt Sam

ue l Bart a , p ro se , 63 07 Han ds om e Lak e Dr., Leo n Vall ey , Tex as 78 23 8

/s / 

## Per Hardy PER HARDY Att or ne y for Rel at or Arth ur Raynes

- 2 1

-CERTIFI CATE OF COMPLIANCE

I cert ify th at th is do cu m en t was pr od uc ed on a co m pu te r us in g W or dP erfe ct X5 an d
co nt ai ns 5,2 33 wor ds , as de te rm in e d by W or dP erfe ct ’s wor d- co un t fu nc ti on , ex cl ud in g th e se ct io ns of th e do cu m en t li st ed in Tex as Ru le s of App el la te Pro ced ur e 9.4 (i) (1 ).

/s / 

## Per Hardy PER HARDY Att or ne y for Rel at or Arth ur Raynes

- 2 2

-