NO. 12-15-00004-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

RON SEALE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS 

THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE 

ESTATE OF CLARA LAVINIA SEALE, 

APPELLANT

V.

HORACE TRUETT SEALE AND 

WIFE, NAN SEALE,

APPELLEES

§

§

§

APPEAL FROM THE

COUNTY COURT AT LAW

VAN ZANDT COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Ron Seale, individually and as the representative of the estate of Clara Lavinia Seale, 

appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his suit against Horace Truett Seale and Nan Seale. We 

affirm.

BACKGROUND

Ron Seale, individually and as representative of the estate of Clara Lavinia Seale, his 

mother, filed suit against his brother and sister-in-law, Horace Truett Seale and Nan Seale. He 

asserted that his mother’s estate is the owner in fee simple of certain real property in Van Zandt 

County that was wrongfully deeded to Defendants in 1999 by their father. Ron requested the 

court to declare that Defendants have no right to the real property, or alternatively, declare the 

specific nature and value of any interest they have and that they be held to account to the estate 

for rents and profits received from the property. The trial court granted Defendants’ motion to 

dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction. 
2

JURISDICTION

In his sole issue, Ron contends the trial court erred in dismissing his suit for want of 

jurisdiction. He argues that this is a declaratory judgment action in which he seeks an 

interpretation of a deed to determine its validity. He asserts that the Van Zandt County Court at 

Law has jurisdiction over this suit because his petition does not raise the issues of title or 

recovery of land.

A person interested under a deed may have questions of construction or validity 

determined by a court. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 37.004(a) (West 2015). If 

resolution of a dispute does not require a determination of which party held title at a particular 

time, the dispute can properly be raised in a declaratory judgment action. I-10 Colony, Inc. v. 

Lee, 393 S.W.3d 467, 475 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2012, pet. denied). However, when 

title to real property is at issue in a suit, trespass to try title is the exclusive remedy. TEX. PROP.

CODE ANN. § 22.001(a) (West 2014).

In his petition, Ron claimed that his mother’s estate owns the land at issue and, although 

Defendants possess the land, they have no right or title to the property. He asked the court to 

construe a 1999 instrument signed by his father that purportedly conveyed the land to Defendants 

and to declare that Defendants have no right to the property, at law or in equity. Alternatively, 

he asked the court to declare the specific nature and value of any interest Defendants have in the 

property. 

Ron filed a notice of lis pendens in this case stating that “[t]he action seeks to establish 

title to the real property the subject of this suit; to obtain a declaratory judgment that determines 

the interest of the heirs in the property and to seek partition of that interest.” In spite of his 

claims to the contrary, Ron is asking for an adjudication of title to the real property. He wants 

the county court at law to declare that title is in his mother’s estate.

The County Court at Law of Van Zandt County is a statutory county court. TEX. GOV’T 

CODE ANN. § 25.2361 (West Supp. 2014). A statutory county court has the same jurisdiction as 

a constitutional county court. TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 25.0003(a) (West Supp. 2014). A 

county court does not have jurisdiction in a suit for the recovery of land. TEX. GOV’T CODE 

ANN. § 26.043(8) (West 2004). The Van Zandt County Court at Law has concurrent jurisdiction 

with the district court in certain enumerated matters. TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 25.2362 (West 

Supp. 2014). Recovery of land is not among those matters. A statutory county court has no 
3

jurisdiction over cases in which the gist of the plaintiff’s claim is an adjudication of title, even if 

the judgment sought does not include an express grant of relief with respect to title. See Merit 

Mgmt. Partners I, L.P. v. Noelke, 266 S.W.3d 637, 647 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, no pet.). 

Accordingly, because Ron’s cause of action is a suit for the recovery of land, the Van Zandt 

County Court at Law does not have jurisdiction over the cause of action. We overrule Ron’s sole 

issue.

DISPOSITION

Having overruled Ron’s sole issue, we affirm the trial court’s order of dismissal.

BRIAN HOYLE

Justice

Opinion delivered July 22, 2015.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(PUBLISH)
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JULY 22, 2015

NO. 12-15-00004-CV

RON SEALE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS THE

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF CLARA LAVINIA SEALE,

Appellant

V.

HORACE TRUETT SEALE AND WIFE, NAN SEALE,

Appellees

Appeal from the County Court at Law 

of Van Zandt County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. CV04637)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed 

herein, and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the 

order of dismissal.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the order of 

dismissal of the court below be in all things affirmed, and that all costs of this appeal are 

hereby adjudged against the appellant, RON SEALE, for which execution may issue, and that 

the decision be certified to the court below for observance.

Brian Hoyle, Justice.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.