arrow left
arrow right
  • Lee Merwin, et al  vs.  Janice Rushing, et alPROPERTY document preview
  • Lee Merwin, et al  vs.  Janice Rushing, et alPROPERTY document preview
  • Lee Merwin, et al  vs.  Janice Rushing, et alPROPERTY document preview
  • Lee Merwin, et al  vs.  Janice Rushing, et alPROPERTY document preview
  • Lee Merwin, et al  vs.  Janice Rushing, et alPROPERTY document preview
  • Lee Merwin, et al  vs.  Janice Rushing, et alPROPERTY document preview
						
                                

Preview

FILED 11/16/2020 1:24 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS CO., TEXAS Terri Kilgore DEPUTY CAUSE NO. DC-18-08876 LEE MERWIN AND BETTY § IN THE DISTRICT COURT MERWIN, § § Plainti's, § § vs. § 192nd JUDICIAL DISTRICT § JANICE RUSI-HNG AND LIGE § RUSHING JR., § § Defendants. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS § MERWINS’ REQUEST FOR FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING THE COURT’S FINAL JUDGMENT Under Texas Rule 0f Civil Procedure 296, Lee and Betty Merwin (collectively, the “Merwins”) le this, their Request for Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law regarding the Court’s Judgments issued in this case. RE UEST 1. On July 9, 2018, the Merwins led their original petition against Janice Rushing and Lige Rushing, Jr. 2. On March 27, 2019, the Court Ordered its Amended Summary Judgment Order, nding that the Merwins take nothing by their trespass t0 try title suit, and further ordered that the Merwins’ driveway and fence encroached on the Rushings’ property, and ordered they be removed at the Merwins’ cost and expense. 3. On October 13, 2020, the Court signed the “Second Summary Judgment Order,” Which was an outdated order not agreed upon by the Parties. The Second REQUEST FOR FINDlNGS 0F FACT & CONCLUSION OF LAW PAGE l 1677735V1 - M1673.00002 201 1 16 Request for FFCL - Final Summary Judgment Order found that the MerWins have not adversely possessed portions of the Rushings’ property described as the “Disputed Green Space” and further found that the relief granted to the Rushings in the Summary Judgment Order is not barred by a “de minimus doctrine” nding. 4. The Merwins and the Rushings appeared before the Court on October 13, 2020, and presented arguments to the Court as to the “de minimus” defense asserted by the Merwins. 5. The Court signed a Judgment on October 26, 2020. The Judgment ordered that the Partial Summary Judgment Order previously entered by this Court, which found the Merwins have obtained no title to the Rushings by adverse possession is now a Final Judgment. The Judgment also made additional orders regarding the Merwins’ fence and the Rushings’ Property. 6. Under Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 297, the Merwins respectfully requests that the Court a) le findings of fact and conclusions of law for its Final Judgment, inclusive of all Summary Judgment Orders, Within twenty (20) days of this request and b) cause a copy of its findings of fact and conclusions of law to be mailed to each party in the suit. REQUEST FOR FINDINGS 0F FACT & CONCLUSION OF LAW PAGE 2 1677735V1 - M1673.00002 201 1 16 Request for FFCL - Final Respectfully submitted, Underwood Perkins, P.C. /s/ ScottM Gareljck Scott M. Garelick State Bar No. 24029053 Alex M. Campbell State Bar No. 24095536 5420 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1900 Dallas, Texas 75240 Telephone: (972) 661-5114 Facsimile: (972) 661-5691 Emaili sgarelick@uplawtx.com acampbell@uplawtX.com Attorneys for Lee and Betty Merwjn CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on the 16th day of November 2020, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on all counsel of record using the Court’s ECF system. /s/A]eX M Campbell Alex M. Campbell REQUEST FOR FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSION OF LAW PAGE 3 1677735V1 - M1673.00002 201 l6 Request for FFCL - Final 1