Opinion ID: 4513206
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: KONE’s Quiet Title Claim

Text: KONE argues that it stated a valid “cause of action for declaratory relief to remove cloud on title.” In KONE’s original complaint, it sought “a declaratory judgment to declare that it is the owner of the Property and to declare that Defendant the Bank has no interest in the Property.” Later in its complaint, it stated that “KONE seeks a judgment to strike any interest of Defendant Bank as a cloud on KONE’s title.” But as BANA argues on appeal, KONA failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because it did not explain how BANA’s lien on the Property was invalid or unenforceable. See Essex Crane Rental Corp. v. Carter, 371 S.W.3d 366, 388 (Tex. App.–Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, pet. denied) (“A suit to clear title or quiet title—also known as a suit to remove cloud from title—relies on the invalidity of the defendant’s claim to the property.”). Accordingly, we reject KONE’s argument that it stated a claim to remove cloud on title that was plausible on its face. KONE also suggests that BANA’s right to enforce the deed of trust is barred by the statute of limitations since the former owner defaulted on the note as early as 2011. The record reflects, however, that BANA sent a notice of acceleration to Qasem on May 9, 2015 and BANA sued Baeissa, Qasem, and Trans for declaratory judgment, judicial foreclosure, and equitable subrogation on June 24, 2016. This was well within the 4-year statute of limitations prescribed by Texas law. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 16.035(a) (“A person must bring suit for the recovery of real property under a real property 4 Case: 19-20518 Document: 00515333413 Page: 5 Date Filed: 03/05/2020 No. 19-20518 lien or the foreclosure of a real property lien not later than four years after the day the cause of action accrues.”).1