Motion for Summary Adjudication in CRISTINA MARTINEZ VS. ROLINDA K. FORBECK| Trellis.Law

On September 16, 2022 a Exhibit,Appendix was filed involving a dispute between Martinez, Cristina, and Forbeck, Rolinda K., for Real Property - Other Real Property (OCA) in the District Court of Hidalgo County.

Preview
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

NO. C-3619—22—H

CRISTINA MARTIENZ, a/k/a § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
CRISTINA MARTINEZ GUERRA §
Plaintiff, §
§
v. § 389TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
ROLINDA K. FORBECK, §
Defendant. § HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS

DEFENDANT AND COUNTER—PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

NOW COMES Rolinda K. Forbeck, Defendant and Counter-Plaintiff herein, and ﬁles

this Motion for Partial Summaly Judgment, and would show the Court the following:

I. Brief Statement of Basis for Summary Judgment

1. This Motion addresses the violation 0f the ﬁduciary relationship between Plaintiff

Cristina Martinez (“Cristina”) and Cristina’s daughter, Defendant and Counter-Plaintiff Rolinda

K. Forbeck (“Rolinda”), speciﬁcally as it regards the property that is the subject of this suit. The

evidence of this case and applicable law conclusively establish that the entirety 0f property in

question is owned in fee simple by Rolinda, and that a deed (ﬁled in March of 2022) executed by

Cristina and her parents, who are Third Party Defendants Jose Martinez and Esperanza Martinez,

breached Cristina’s ﬁduciary duty to Rolinda and should be declared null and void.

2. Cristina obtained funds held in the registry of the court in trust for Rolinda for the

purpose of purchasing property and building a house on the property. After obtaining Rolinda’s
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

funds, Cristina obtained a deed t0 the property (from Cristina’s parents) as Trustee for Rclinda,

and Cristina contracted for construction of a house 0n the property. Rolinda was approximately 8

years 01d at the time.

3. Subsequently in 2022, after Rolinda learned that she was the owner 0f the

property, Rolinda took steps to exercise control over the property. Within weeks thereafter,

Cristina, together with her parents (as the original grantors 0f the property), executed and ﬁled a

“correction” deed attempting t0 divest Rolinda 0f title. The evidence will establish that the

funds used to purchase the property and construct the house belonged t0 Rolinda, that Cristina

obtained title t0 the property as Trustee for Rolinda, that in breach 0f her ﬁduciary duty to

Rolinda, Cristina (and the Third Party Defendants) ﬁled an invalid “correction” deed purporting

to divest Rolinda of ownership of the property, and that Cristina has n0 legally valid claim to

ownership 0f the property by adverse possession.

4. This Motion seeks only the declarations that the “correction” deed is invalid, that

the property belongs solely to Rolinda, and that Cristina has no interest in it. This Motion does

not address any other of Rolinda’s claims for damages arising from breach of ﬁduciary duty 0r

fraud, and Rolinda does not waive her claims for additional relief.

II. Facts

5. As a child, Rolinda (then known as Rolinda K. Guerra) was injured in an

automobile accident, and recovered a judgment for $283,900.42 in the 93“ District Court.‘ The

Roland Guerra, Individually and as Next Friend 0f Rolinda K. Guerra, a Minor, vs. Christina
Martinez Guerra, et (11.; Case No. C—4321—97—B.
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

judgment ordered that the funds be deposited for Rolinda into the registry of the Court until she

turned 18 (0r further order ofthe Court)?

6. On 0r about May 13, 1999, Cristina ﬁled a sworn Guardian’s Application t0

Expand Funds3 with the 93rd District Court seeking Court approval for release 0f $60,300.00

from Rolinda’s funds held in the registry 0f the Court for the following:

A. Build a brick home $52,500.00

B. Install septic tank and obtain required permits $ 1,300.00

C. Partition 0f the property $ 500.00

D. Purchase 0f 1.0 acre in Weslaco, Texas on Mile
11 North and Mile 6 West $ 6,000.00
$60,300.00

A copy 0f the sworn Application is attached to this Motion as Exhibit B, and it included a copy

of a signed Proposal contract for construction of a brick house with 1,245 sq’ 0f living area, 297

sq’ for a garage, 77 sq’ for a patio and 18 sq’ for a porch, for a total 0f 1,646 sq’ for a price of

$54,000. The Application was approved by Order dated August 10, 1999. A copy of the Order

Approving Expenditure is attached as Exhibit C.

7. By deed dated September 10, 1999 and recorded under Clerk’s Document N0.

818064 in the Ofﬁce of the County Clerk 0f Hidalgo County, Texas, Third Party Defendants Jose

Martinez and Esperanza Martinez purchased a 5.0 acre tract 0f land (the “Parent Tract”) out of

Farm Tract 200, Block 181, West Tract Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas, which is 0n Mile

11 North near Mile 6 West.

2
Judgment dated March 9, 1998 (attached to this Motion as Exhibit A).

3
The application was ﬁled as if pursuant to a guardianship, which did not formally exist.

3
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

8. Thereafter, on 0r about November 19, 1999, Cristina apparently signed a

Mechanic’s Lien Note in the amount 0f $54,000.00, payable t0 Gustavo Garcia d/b/a Garcia

Construction, for construction 0f a house. Rolinda does not have a copy of that note, nor was it

produced by Cristina despite a proper discovery request.

9. By Gift Deed dated December 16, 1999, and recorded on March 1, 2000 under

Clerk’s Document No. 850576 in the Ofﬁce of the County Clerk of Hidalgo County, Texas (the

“1999 Deed”), Third Party Defendants Jose Martinez and Esperanza Martinez conveyed a 1.421

acre tract out of the Parent Tract to Cristina Maﬂinez Guerra, Trustee for Rolinda K. Guerra, a

minor. A copy 0f the recorded 1999 Deed is attached hereto as Exhibit D. The 1.421 acre tract

is the property that is the subj ect 0f this suit, is described by mates and bounds in the 1999 Deed,

and will be referred t0 in this Motion as the “Property.” The 1999 Deed describes the

consideration for the conveyance of the Property as being “[F]0r the Love and Affection we have

for our daughter.” In the 1999 Deed, Third Party Defendants did not reserve any portion of or

rights in the Property.

10. By a Mechanic’s Lien Contract dated December 27, 1999, and recorded 0n March

1, 2000 under Clerk’s Document N0. 850577 in the Ofﬁce 0f the County Clerk 0f Hidalgo

-
County, Texas, Cristina in the capacity as Trustee for Rolinda K. Guerra, a minor - granted a

mechanic’s lien 0n the Property in favor of Fela B. Olivarez to secure payment 0f “cash” of

$54,000.00 for contractor Gustavo Garcia d/b/a Garcia Construction, for the “construction of a

residence as per plans and speciﬁcations agreed t0 by the par” (sic). A copy of the recorded

Mechanic’s Lien Contract is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

11. By a Deed of Trust dated December 27, 1999, and recorded on March 1, 2000

under Clerk’s Document N0. 850578 in the Ofﬁce of th6 County Clerk of Hidalgo County,

Texas, Cristina — in the capacity as Trustee for Rolinda K. Guerra, a minor —
granted a deed of

trust lien 0n the Property in favor of Fela B. Olivarez, as trustee, to secure payment 0f the

Mechanic’s Lien Note 0f November 19, 1999, in the amount of $54,000.00 payable to Gustavo

Garcia d/b/a Garcia Construction. A copy 0f the recorded Deed of Trust is attached hereto as

Exhibit F.

12. On March 15, 2000, Cristina ﬁled another sworn Application t0 Expend Funds

with the 93rd District Court, seeking an additional $1,750.00 to “ﬁnish paying the construction of

7
Applicant’s and Minor’s home.’ This Application was ﬁled by Cristina as “custodial parent,”

but in the Application she again refers t0 herself as “Guardian.” The stated use 0f the $1,750.00

was for an additional $1,500.00 for the construction contract with Garcia Construction, and

$250.00 for attorney’s fees for Fela B. Olivarez. A copy of Cristina’s March 15, 2000

Application t0 Expand Funds (together with the Memorandum ﬁled with it) is attached hereto as

Exhibit G. A copy of the signed Order Approving Expenditure (dated March 20, 2000) is

attached hereto as Exhibit H.

13. After the house was built on the Property, Cristina lived there with Rolinda for

many years. After 2012 (sometime after Rolinda graduated from high school), she moved with

Cristina to the San Antonio area, where Cristina worked and Rolinda went to school and worked.

14. In 2014, Cristina, using funds belonging t0 Rolinda as a down payment, purchased

a house in Spring Branch, where the two of them took up residence. Thereafter, neither of them
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

moved back to reside in the house 0n the Property. Instead, they resided together in Spring

Branch until Rolinda’s marriage in 201 7.

15. Sometime in 201 8 or 2019, Cristina had agreed to lease the Propeﬁy t0 her sister

Amanda Martinez (and her family). As consideration for the right to occupy the Property,

Amanda Martinez and her husband Jose Morales purportedly agreed t0 pay the ad valorem taxes

on the Property.

16. In early 2022, Rolinda received a telephone call from Cristina in which Cristina

told Rolinda that Rolinda needed to pay approximately $8,000.00 for replacement of the roof of

Rolinda’s house 0n the Property. To Rolinda’s recollection, this telephone call was the ﬁrst time

that she learned that she owned the Property (and/or the house). On March 4, 2022, Rolinda

(acting through her undersigned attorney) gave Amanda Martinez and Jose Morales notice that

their lease was terminated by Rolinda, as the property owner, and that they should vacate the

Property.

17. In response to the notice t0 vacate given to Amanda Martinez and Jose Morales,

Cristina and Third Party Defendants Jose Martinez and Esperanza Martinez executed a

Correction Gift Deed that was dated March 31, 2022 and recorded under Clerk’s Document N0.

3327436 in the Ofﬁce 0f the County Clerk 0f Hidalgo County, Texas (the “Correction Deed”).

The Correction Deed was executed by Jose Martinez and Esperanza Martinez as Grantors, and

approved and accepted by Cristina Martinez Guerra, Trustee for Rolinda K. Guerra, a minor. A

copy 0f the recorded Correction Deed is attached hereto as Exhibit I. The Correction Deed stated

that the Grantee was:
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

“Cristina Martinez Guerra, Trustee for Rolinda K. Guerra, a minor; Cristina

Martinez Guerra owner 0f the unimproved 1.421 acres of land and Rolinda K.
Guerra owner 0f the house and improvements”.

The Correction Deed was not executed 0r accepted by Rolinda, who in 2022 was no longer a

minor. As the reason for the Correction Deed, it recited that:

“This Deed is made in place 0f and as a Deed 0f Correction 0f a Gift Deed
executed by Grantors herein t0 Grantee, Dated December 16, 1999, and recorded
under Document number 850576 0n March 1, 2000, Deed Records of Hidalgo
County, Texas, wherein by error or mistake the title t0 the property was placed
under Cristina Martinez Guerra, Trustee for Rolinda K. Guerra, a minor. Thus,
reﬂecting Rolinda K. Guerra as the owner 0f the land which was not our intention.
In the original deed signed on December 16, 1999, the consideration was for the

love and affection we have for our daughter which conﬁrms our intentions that the

land was conveyed t0 our daughter, Cristina Martinez Guerra only and not
Rolinda K. Guerra.

When in truth and fact Rolinda K. Guerra’s name was added t0 the Deed only t0
obtain funds held 0n her behalf in the Hidalgo County Registry of the Court so

that our daughter, Cristina Martinez Guerra could build a house for Rolinda K.
Guerra.

The house that was built with Rolinda K. Guerra’s personal injury funds, belongs
to Rolinda K. Guerra; however, the land that the house was built on belongs t0 our

daughter, Cristina Martinez Guerra.

Our daughter, Cristina Martinez Guerra should have been reﬂected as the owner
0f the land described above, as this is her inheritance from us as her parents, Jose

Martinez and wife Esperanza Martinez, Grantors herein.”

18. Thereafter, in May of 2022, Rolinda ﬁled an eviction proceeding, seeking to

obtain possession of the Property from Amanda Martinez and Jose Morales. The defendants in
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

the eviction proceeding, acting through their attorney, Fela B. Olivarez, responded with a plea t0

the jurisdiction 0f the Justice Court, asserting that the Correction Deed created an issue of title.

At the end 0f July 2022, Amanda Martinez and Jose Morales moved out 0f the house on the

Property.

19. In September 0f 2022, after Rolinda’s representatives attempted to enter the

Propeﬁy to inspect and secure it, Cristina ﬁled this suit, claiming ownership 0f the Propeﬁy

under the grant of the 1999 Deed and under the theory 0f adverse possession.

III. Summary Judgment Standard

20. A trial court is empowered t0 grant a motion for summary judgment and render

judgment for the movant when it is conclusively shown that the moving party is entitled t0

judgment as a matter 0f law. Summary judgment is proper when the movant shows that there is

no genuine issue of material fact, and that it is entitled t0 judgment as a matter 0f law. Nixon v.

Mr. Property Management Ca, 690 S.W.2d 546, 548 (Tex. 1985). Uncontroverted evidence

favoring the movant Will be taken as true. Casey V. Amarillo Hosp. Dist, 947 S.W.2d 301, 303—

304 (Tex. App. - Amarillo 1997, writ denied).

IV. Argument and Authorities

A. The 2022 Correction Deed is invalid as a conection instrument.

21. The 2022 Correction Deed purports t0 be an instrument “correcting” the 1999

Deed, but does not meet the requirements for a correction deed. Texas Property Code § 5.029(b)

provides that a material correction 0f a recorded instrument must be executed by each party to the
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

recorded original instrument (or such parties’ heirs, successors 0r assigns).4 Rolinda, as the sole

beneﬁciary 0f the trust by which Cristina took title in 1999, was no longer a minor in 2022, and

thus was a successor to Cristina (as trustee for Rolinda). It follows that in 2022 Rolinda was a

current owner of the Property under the grant of the 1999 Deed, and because she did not execute

the 2022 Correction Deed, the requirements of § 5.029(b) were not met. Cristina’s attempt to

seize title t0 the Property from Rolinda by ﬁling a spurious Correction Deed fails as a matter 0f

law.

B. Elements of Breach 0f Fiduciarv Duty.

22. Proof of a breach 0f ﬁduciary duty requires three elements: (1) existence 0f a

ﬁduciary relationship between the parties; (2) breach 0f the ﬁduciary duty; and (3) that the breach

resulted in an injury. Aside from the ﬁduciary duties imposed on a guardian, there are three basic

sources of ﬁduciary duty under Texas law: the trust instrument, the Texas Trust Codef and the

common law, in that order. Texas Property Code § 112.001 provides that a trust may be created

by a property owner’s declaration that the property is held in trust for another person.

C. Existence 0f Fiduciary Dutv Owed bV Cristina to Rolinda.

23. It is undisputed that Cristina owed a ﬁduciary duty to Rolinda as a matter 0f law.

First, she admitted it in her response to Requests for Admission.6 Second, the 1999 Deed

4
“[A] validly executed correction instrument under section 5.029 must be signed by the
property’s current owners.” Broadway Nat’l Bank, Trustee v. Yates Energy Corp, 631 S.W.3d 16, at 18
(Tex. 2021).

5
Title 9, Texas Property Code.

6
See Responses No. 1, No. 6 and N0. 10 on attached Exhibit J, copy 0f“Petitioner, Cristina
Martinez, a/k/a Cristina Martinez Guerra’s Answers to Respondent, Rolinda K. Forbeck First Set 0f
Request for Admissions”.
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

(Exhibit D) speciﬁcally declares Cristina t0 be Rolinda’s trustee. Because there was no separate

trust instrument, by operation 0f the Texas Trust Code and common law, Cristina’s trustee role

creates her ﬁduciary duty to Rolinda. Third, in her sworn Application to Expand Funds ﬁled

May 13, 1999 (Exhibit B), Cristina represented t0 the 93rd District Court that she was Rolinda’s

guardian, judicially admitting a ﬁduciary relationship.7 The respective relationships of guardian

With ward and trustee with beneﬁciary are both relationships creating a ﬁduciary duty 0f the

former to the 1atter.8 Therefore, Cristina is estoppedg from asserting that she was not acting in a

ﬁduciary capacity for Rolinda.

D. Requirements of Fiduciary Dutv.

24. Fiduciary duties are the highest duties known t0 the law. The trustee has the duties

of (1) loyalty, (2) competence, (3) full disclosure and (4) to exercise reasonable discretion.” The

duty of loyalty owed t0 the beneﬁciary requires a ﬁduciary t0 place the interests of the

7
Paine et al. v. Golden et al, No. 01—21-00399—CV, (Tex. App. Houston [15‘ Dist] June
22, 2023), at 33-34.

8
“A guardian is a ﬁduciary 0f a ward under the guardian’s care and muct exhibit the highest
degree 0f loyalty and ﬁdelity in the guardian’s relations with the ward.” Texas Supreme Court Code 0f
Ethicsfor Guardians; Misc. Docket N0. 16—9103.

9
“The doctrine ofjudicial estoppel 'precludes a party from adopting a position inconsistent with
one that it maintained successfully in an earlier proceeding.” Pleasant Glade Assembly ofGod v.
Schubert, 264 S.W.3d 1, 6 (Tex. 2008) (quoting 2 Roy W. McDonald & Elaine G. Carlson, Texas Civil
Practice § 9.51 at 576 (2d ed. 2003)), “The doctrine is not strictly speaking estoppel, but rather is a rule of
procedure based onjustice and sound public policy.” Pleasant Glade, 264 S.W.3d at 6 (citing Long v.
Knox, 291 S.W.2d 292, 295 (1956)). Judicial estoppel is not punitive; it precludes a party from gaining an
unfair advantage by adopting inconsistent positions in litigation and “playing fast and loose with the
judicial system for their own beneﬁt.” Ferguson v. Bldg. Materials Corp. 0fAm., 295 S.W.3d 642, 643
(Tex. 2009).

10
See generally, the article “Remedies for Breach 0f Fiduciary Duty”, Burdette and Weber;
State Bar of Texas 37‘“ Annual Advanced Estate Planning and Probate Course, June 2013.

10
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

beneﬁciary above her own at all times.” Thus, a ﬁduciary must not “self—deal” 0r personally

beneﬁt from dealing with trust property; and the trust property must be “managed” solely in the

interest of the beneﬁciary.” Any self—dealing by a ﬁduciary gives rise to a presumption 0f

'3
unfairness.

E. Cristina’s Breach 0f her Fiduciarv Duty.

25. By signing the 2022 Correction Deed (Exhibit I) and asserting that Cristina was

the true owner of the Property, Cristina (in conspiracy with her parents) sought to transfer

beneﬁcial ownership 0f the Property from Rolinda t0 herself - which is obvious self-dealing and

an obvious attempt t0 to personally beneﬁt. Cristina asserts in her Petition that the 1.421 acres

0n which the house was built was a gift speciﬁcally to her -
and not to Rolinda - despite the

unequivocal grantee clause in the deed (t0 Cristina as Trustee for the beneﬁt of Rolinda). The

sworn Guardian’s Application t0 Expend Funds of May 13, 1999 (Exhibit B) speciﬁcally

represented t0 the Court that $6,000.00 (of the $60,300.00 of Rolinda’s trust funds Cristina

sought access to) was designated for purchase 0f the Property. The expenditure 0f those funds

was approved on August 10, 1999. Cristina is judicially estopped from asserting that Rolinda’s

funds were not used t0 purchase the Property or that Rolinda is not the owner of the Property.

26. Cristina’s parents, the Third Party Defendants Jose Martinez and Esperanza

Martinez, purchased the 5.0 acre Parent Tract 0n or about September 10, 1999. It is reasonable

to infer that Rolinda’s funds were withdrawn from the registry of the court and a $6,000.00

"
Slay v. Burnett Trust, 187 s.w.2d 377 (Tex. 1945).

‘2
Texas Property Code § 117.007.

l3
Texas Bank & Trust C0. v. Moore, 595 S.W.2d 502 (Tex. 1980).

11
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

portion paid t0 the Martinezes and used for the purchase 0f the Parent Tract. The Correction

Deed states that Rolinda’s trust funds were used to build the house 0n the Property. Cristina

seeks somehow t0 separate the land from the improvements 0n it, disregarding that the

improvements became part 0f the realty once the house was constructed. In seeking declaration

that she owns the Property, Cristina seeks to divest Rolinda 0f the house as well. Cristina is

judicially estopped from denying that $62,050.00 of Rolinda’s trust funds were used to purchase

the Property and build the house on it.” The Correction Deed represents a brazen attempt t0

divest Rolinda 0f what is rightfully hers and is a clear breach 0f her ﬁduciary duty to Rolinda.

F. Cristina’s Breach 0f her Fiduciary Duty has Caused Injury to Rolinda.

27. The Correction Deed is ﬁled 0f record in the ofﬁcial property records of Hidalgo

County, Texas, and clouds Rolinda’s title to the Property. Because the Correction Deed is

invalid, Rolinda is entitled t0 have the cloud 0n title removed by action of this Court.

E. Adverse Possession Claim Fails.

28. In her Petition, Cristina asserts that she has acquired ownership of the Property —

(including the house) as against Rolinda’s interests ~
by adverse possession.” Cristina asserts

that she has been in “open, notorious, exclusive and hostile” possession 0f the Property for 23

years, and has paid taxes on the Property. Cristina’s adverse possession claim fails as a matter of

law.

14
Paine, at 33.

15
Cristina’s argument for adverse possession includes ownership of the house, as an
improvement on the land, thereby seeking to divest Rolinda of any interest in the Property despite
acknowledging that Rolinda’s funds were used to construct the house!

12
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

29. First, as Rolinda’s parent, Cristina had a parental obligation of support — which

continued from 1999 when Rolinda was 8 years 01d through Rolinda’s 18‘“ birthday in 2009.

Both Rolinda and Cristina lived 0n the Property until 2012, and thus, Cristina’s “possession”

could not be considered exclusive from 01' hostile to Rolinda for those years. Cristina and

Rolinda continued t0 reside together in one household, and Cristina took no actions that could be

construed to give Rolinda notice that Cristina claimed the Property as her own -
until 2018 or

2019 When Cristina authorized Rolinda’s aunt’s family to live there. Cristina herself never lived

0n the Property after she and Rolinda moved to the San Antonio area.

30. Further, as Guardian/Trustee for Rolinda, Cristina has an even higher barrier in

claiming adverse possession. Because Cristina went into possession of the Property as Trustee

for Rolinda, Cristina cannot claim to be in open, adverse, and hostile possession of the Property.

Only after giving clear notice of repudiation 0f the relationship under which she took peaceful

possession can any claim by her begin t0 run.” No such repudiation was ever given. Therefore,

at all times after Cristina’s initial possession as Trustee for Rolinda, she was possessing

peacefully for Rolinda’s beneﬁt. There n0 material facts that would support Cristina’s adverse

possession claim; at best, she has a claim for reimbursement of property taxes.

G. Attorney’s Fees.

31. Rolinda seeks recovery for her attorney’s fees in connection with this Motion for

Partial Summary Judgment, in an amount to be determined by the Court following hearing.

Because of the wrongful refusal of Cristina and Third Party Defendants Jose Martinez and

16
Gaynier v. Ginsberg, 715 S.W.2d 749, 755 (Tex. App. Dallas 1986), citing Todd v. Bruner,
365 S.W.2d 155, 159 (Tex. 1963).

13
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

Esperanza Martinez t0 remove the cloud 0n Rolinda’s title, she has been required to employ the

undersigned attorney and to bring this suit. Rolinda is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs

pursuant t0 §37.009 0f the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Rolinda sues for all costs

and reasonable and necessary attorney's fees incurred by her herein in an amount to be

subsequently determined by the Court, including all fees necessary in the event of an appeal 0f

this cause t0 the Court 0f Appeals and the Supreme Court of Texas, as the Court deems equitable

and just.

V. Conclusion

32. Plaintiff is entitled to partial summary judgment as a matter of law on her claim

for relief declaring that the Correction Deed is invalid and that she owns fee simple title t0 the

Property. There is no genuine dispute that Rolinda’s funds were used t0 purchase and improve

the Property, that Cristina owed a ﬁduciary duty to Rolinda, and that Cristina (acting in concert

with Third-party Defendants Jose Martinez and Esperanza Martinez) violated her ﬁduciary duty

by signing and recording the invalid Correction Deed.

PRAYER

Plaintiff prays that the Court, after notice and hearing, grant this Motion for Partial

Summary Judgment and issue a judicial declaration that the Correction Deed is void, thereby

canceling that instrument and removing the cloud cast on Plaintiff’s title by said instrument;

issue a judicial declaration that the Plaintiff is the fee simple owner of the Property; and award

Plaintiff her costs of court, attorney's fees, and such other and fumher relief as Plaintiff may be

entitled t0 in law 0r in equity.

14
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

Respectfully submitted,

("d
{ngwtléﬁv
g

Barry E. Jones
State
m

Bar No.: 10859200
‘
w
"”'

Attorney for Rolinda K. Forbeck
3rd
324 W. Street
Mercedes, Texas 78570
Tel. (956) 565—8490
Fax. (956) 565—6514
Email: barry@bejlawﬁrm.com

15
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that 0n November 74b, 2023, a true and correct copy 0f Defendant and Counter—
Plaintiff Rolinda K. Forbeck’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment was served on Fela B.
Olivarez, attorney for Plaintiff Cristina Martinez and Third Party Defendants Jose Martinez and
Esperanza Martinez, by email to fbolivarez@sbcglobal. net.

f/ﬂ?
\
\

49¢..- Wcix W
I

I “
Barry E Jones
E——mail:barry@bejlawﬁrmcom

16
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

NO. C—3619-22—H

CRISTINA MARTIENZ, a/k/a § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
CRISTINA MARTINEZ GUERRA §
Plaintiff, §
§
V. § 389TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
ROLINDA K. FORBECK, §
Defendant. § HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS

APPENDIX TO DEFENDANT AND COUNTER—PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Exhibit A -
Judgment of 93rd District Court in Cause No. C-4321-97-B-1, dated
March 9, 1998

Exhibit B- Guardian’s Application to Expand Funds ﬁled May 13, 1999
($60,300.00)

Exhibit C ~ Order of 93rd District Court Approving Expenditure ($60,300.00),
dated August 10, 1999

Exhibit D — Deed dated December 16, 1999, recorded under Clerk’s Document
N0. 850576, Ofﬁcial Records, Hidalgo County, Texas

Exhibit E — Mechanic’s Lien Contract dated December 27, 1999,recorded
under Clerk’s Document N0. 850577, Ofﬁcial Records, Hidalgo
County, Texas

Exhibit F - Deed of Trust dated December 27, 1999, recorded under Clerk’s
Document No. 850578, Ofﬁcial Records, Hidalgo County, Texas

Exhibit G - Application to Expend Funds (with Memorandum of Law) ﬁled
March 15, 2000 ($1,750.00)

Exhibit H - Order 0f 93rd District Court Approving Expenditure ($1,750.00),
dated March 20, 2000

Exhibit I - Correction Deed dated March 31, 2022, recorded under Clerk’s
Document N0. 3327436, Ofﬁcial Records, Hidalgo County, Texas
Electronically Filed
11/7/2023 11:54 AM
Hidalgo County District Clerks
Reviewed By: Taylor Lujan

Exhibit J - “Petitioner, Cristina Martinez, a/k/a Cristina Martinez Guerra’s
Answers to Respondent, Rolinda K. Forbeck First Set 0f Request
for Admissions”

ExhibitK— Afﬁdavit of Rolinda K. Forbeck in Support 0f her Motion for
Partial Summary Judgment

Case Info

Judge

Leticia Lopez Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

November 07, 2023

Case Filing Date

September 16, 2022

County

Parties

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Exhibit,Appendix: CRISTINA MARTINEZ VS. ROLINDA K. FORBECK

Preview

Case Info

Parties