Legal Opinion

In Re Fitzmaurice

Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)

Decided July 29, 2004No. 09-04-114 CVPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DON BURGESS, Justice.

In this original proceeding, we determine whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying relators’ motion to cancel a lis pendens. Relators argue the real parties in interest failed to establish an adequate nexus between their claims and the property in question. The real parties in interest contend that their suit seeks to impose a constructive trust on the subject property or to obtain specific performance of a promise to construct community infrastructure and amenities, and therefore is a suit for the establishment of an interest in real property for…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Flores v. HabermanTexas Supreme Court · 1996
  2. First National Petroleum Corp. v. Lloyd, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1995
  3. Teve Holdings Ltd. v. Jackson, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1988
  4. Garza v. Pope, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1997
  5. Olbrich v. TouchyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1989

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Long Beach Mortgage Co. v. Evans, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2009
  2. Jordan v. HaglerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2005
  3. David P. Maniatis v. SLF IV - 114 Assemblage, L.P., Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2019
  4. In Re Fitzmaurice, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2004
  5. John Joseph Jordan D/B/A Premier Construction Services v. Burl and Brenda Hagler, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2005

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API