Wilmer Forrest Trimble, Jr., A/K/A Wilmer Forrest Tremble, Jr., Sharon Trimble Donaldson, Selia Trimble Shawkey, and Billie J. Murphy Tremble v. Luminant Mining Company LLC ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •       RECEIVED IN
    ORIGINAL
    Tha Court of Appeals
    Sixth District
    MAY f<$ 2015                  06-15-00006-CV
    Texarkana, Texas *
    Debra A'jtrey, Clerk                    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS
    STATE OF TEXAS
    The Tremble Family,                                    Luminant Mining Company LLC,
    Billie Murphy Tremble,                                 Energy Future Holdings
    Sharon Tremble Donaldson,                              Corporation and Subsidiaries
    Selia Tremble Shawkey,
    Wilmer Forrest Tremble, Jr.
    The Estate of Wilmer Forrest Tremble, Sr.
    Appellant(s)                                          Appellee
    APPELLANTS' OPENING BRIEF
    Appeal from the Judgment
    Rusk County District Court of Texas
    Date December 16, 2014
    Laury Mark, Deputy
    The Tremble Family:
    Billie Murphy Tremble
    P.O. Box 541
    Marshall, Texas 75671
    billietremble@vahoo.com
    903.938.6829
    Sharon Tremble Donaldson
    2010 Wineberry Drive
    Katy, Texas 77450
    donaldson_sharon@live.com
    281.206.8400
    Selia Tremble Shawkey
    712 South 37thSt.
    San Diego, California 92113
    seliashawkev@gmail.com
    619.454.8123
    Wilmer Forrest Tremble, Jr
    P.O. Box 841865
    Pearland, Texas 77584
    trem455@vahoo.com
    281.384.8491
    TABLE OF CONTENTS
    INDEX OF AUTHORITIES                                              6
    STATEMENT OF THE CASE                                             4
    Nature of Action Sought
    STATEMENT OF FACTS                                                4,5
    SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT                                               5, 6
    PRAYER                                                            7
    ISSUES PRESENTED                                                  3
    Questions Presented on Appeal:
    I.     Whether the Appellant(s) were denied their constitutional and civil
    rights under the Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act (UPHPA)?
    II.    Did the district court err in the signing of Final Judgment without an
    open hearing to consider the evidence?
    III.   Whether or not selective exclusion omitted the appellant(s) from any of
    the decision making processes?
    IV.    Was there an error in the auctioning of undivided inherited heir
    property?
    STATEMENT OF THE CASE
    Nature of Action Sought
    The Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act (UPHPA) states: Any Co-tenant
    (except the co-tenant(s) requesting partition by sale may buy the interest of the
    co-tenant(s) seeking partition for a proportional share of the court determined
    fair market value. The co-tenants have 45 days to exercise the right of first
    refusal, and if exercised, another 60 days to arrange for financing. If more than
    one co-tenant elects to buy the shares of co-tenant(s) seeking partition, the court
    will pro-rate the sellers shares among the buyer according to their existing
    fractional ownership percentages. eHow; how to Partition Undivided Ownership.
    This option was never offered to the Appellant(s).
    The Appellant(s) filed suit December 2014 disputing the possession of their
    undivided inherited heir property; the support is as follows: We are raising a
    genuine issue of material fact. All information recorded in Rusk County Clerk's
    Office pertaining to the land, interest, appraisal of the house was not known to
    the Appellant(s) until December 2013. Nottingham Brick & Title Company v.
    Butler (1889) 16QBD 778. We by law did not and were not privy to pertinent
    information. Smith v. Baker, 
    380 S.W.2d 725
    . The Trial Court granted defendant's
    Motion for Summary Judgment and degreed defendant title and possession of the
    land in controversy: and overruled plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment.
    The Appellant(s) Summary Judgment was issued resulting in a closed civil trial.
    The court issued a Final Judgment in favor of Luminant Mining Company, LLC, and
    the auction of the property was signed on December 16, 2014.
    STATEMENT OF FACT
    The Appellant(s) filed a suit December 12, 2014 alleging Appellee has 100%
    ownership claim in their undivided, inherited, heir property. The documents are
    filed in the Rusk County Clerk's Office, Rusk County Appraisal District and in the
    Court House in Rusk County, Texas (Refer to Rusk County Appraisal District
    record). The deeding was on December 16, 2010 for 37.46 (33.094) acres
    originally owned by Emma Barr Pollard; 65 acres originally owned by W. M.
    Pollard; 25.326 acres originally owned by Betsy Barr Strong that acreage was
    deeded on December 21, 2010. All the 128.46 acres more or less were deeded by
    Emma Jean Trimble Smith aka Emma Jean Tremble Smith signed a Cash Warranty
    Deed on December 13, 2010 (Refer to Cash Warranty Deed) that was notarized
    by Russell Davis, contract Landman for Luminant Mining Company, LLc. (refer to
    Affidavit of Heirship). TD/B/C.2/AC.l/7p.ll para.9. Smith v. Land & House
    Property Corp. (1884) 28 Ch.D7. However, where the person giving the statement
    was in a position to know the true facts and it can be proved that he could not
    reasonably have held such a view as a result, then his opinion will be treated as a
    statement of fact. The Traditional Most Favoured Nations principle is designed to
    establish equity in treatment. Ms Smith is not nor has she ever been the Executor
    of the Estate, Administrator, nor Trustee. The possession of the heir property by
    the Appellee includes: the land, minerals, homestead-its contents, barn-its
    contents, cattle, timber, chicken coop, lakes, wells, etc., this formerly vibrant
    property now sits in ruin surrounded by debris.
    SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
    This is an action seeking declaratory judgment for civil and constitutional
    infringement, unfair business practices, tortuous interference, deliberate and
    unlawful conduct, namely: Since 2009 seeking to possess undivided inherited,
    heir, property. The relief sought is the return of the property and loss of income.
    5
    Tex.rcv tex.RTD.p.166. We by law were not privy to pertinent information from
    the Appellee. Erik L. Collins & Gretchen M. Smith, Awards of Damages of Mental
    Anguish Without Proof of Harm to Reputation. Any misrepresentation is grounds
    for rescission. Museprime Properties v. Adhill Properties [1990] 36 EG 114. In
    Smith v. Land & House Property Corp. (1884) 28 Ch.D7. However where the
    person giving the statement was in a position to know the true facts and it can be
    proved that he could not reasonably have held such a view as a result, then his
    opinion will be treated as a statement of fact.
    The natural facts are relatively simple as a result of this long ordeal, the
    Appellant(s) lost and were deprived of great gains and profit which would
    otherwise have accrued to them, ie. cutting timber, cattle grazing, renting the
    house, etc. as a direct result of the documents filed in the Rusk County Court
    House in Rusk County, Texas.
    INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
    CASES:
    Erik L. Collins &. Gretchen M. Smith, Awards of Damages of Mental
    Anguish Without Proof of Harm to Reputation                               5
    Museprime Properties v. Adhill Properties [1990] 36 EG 114                 5
    Nottingham Brick & Title Company v. Butler (1889) 16QBD 778                4
    Smith v. Baker, 380S.W.2d 725                                             4
    Smith v. Land & House Property Corp. (1884) 28 Ch.D7                      5
    Tex.rcv tex.RTD.p.166                                                      5
    ACT:
    Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act.
    OTHER DOCUMENTS:
    Affidavit of Heirship                                                        5
    Cash Warranty Deed                                                          5
    Final Judgment                                                              4
    Most Favoured Nations Principle                                             5
    Rusk County Appraisal District                                              5
    PRAYER:
    It is our prayer that the Honorable Court will come to our rescue and not allow
    our undivided inherited property to become a statistic of African American
    inherited land taken by force. All these things are evident of a denial of justice
    and civil rights. A declaration that the acts of omission described herein violated
    Appellant(s) rights under the Constitution and laws of the United States. Our
    coveted Declaration of Independence says, "We hold these truths to be self
    evident, that all men are created equal..."The Virginia Declaration of Rights,
    authored by George Mason and approved by the Virginia Convention on June 12,
    1776, contains the following: all men are by nature equally free and independent,
    and have certain inherent rights of life, liberty, which mean of acquiring and
    possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." However,
    minorities have systematically been denied their land rights. Ownership of land
    has always been deemed a valuable economic resource that is and has been in
    many cases taken by violence, legal exploitation, and trickery. It is our fervent
    prayer this land will remain in our family for generations to come and that we will
    be compensated for the loss of income due to the documents that are filed in
    Rusk County Court House, Rusk County, Texas. We the members of the Tremble
    Family throw ourselves on the mercy of the court. Amen.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-15-00006-CV

Filed Date: 5/19/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/29/2016