law-FD forcible detainer | lease law eviction FED cases |
Forcible Detainer
An action for forcible detainer is intended to be a speedy, simple, and inexpensive means to regain
possession of property. Marshall v. Hous. Auth. of City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782, 787 (Tex.
2006). Under the Property Code, a person who refuses to surrender possession of real property on
demand commits a forcible detainer if the person: wilfully and without force holds-over after
termination of the right of possession; or is a tenant at will or by sufferance, including an occupant at
the time of foreclosure of a lien superior to the tenant's lease. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. ' 24.002(a)
(Vernon 2000).
Salaymeh v. Plaza Centro, LLC (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 26, 2008)(Seymore)
(lease law, damages for unpaid rent reversed for lack of sufficient proof, consolidated appeals in two forcible
detainer suits)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by Justice Seymore
Before Justices Fowler, Seymore and Guzman)
14-07-00394-CV Mohammad Salaymeh d/b/a Rainbow Seafood v. Plaza Centro, LLC
Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No 2 of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Judge Gary Michael Block
Here, the trial court awarded lost rents pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 752, which provides in
pertinent part:
On the trial of the cause in the county court the appellant or appellee shall be permitted to plead, prove and
recover his damages, if any, suffered for withholding or defending possession of the premises during the
pendency of the appeal. Damages may include but are not limited to loss of rentals during the pendency of
the appeal . . .
Tex. R. Civ. P. 752.[3] To support an award of lost rents under rule 752, the plaintiff must prove the
defendant occupied the leased premises during the pendency of the appeal. See Powell v. Mel Powers Inv.
Builder, 590 S.W.2d 837, 839 (Tex. App.- Houston [14th Dist.] 1979, no writ) (holding evidence was
insufficient to support trial court's award of lost rents under Rule 752 because no evidence showed tenant
occupied premises during pendency of appeal).
Hong Kong Development Inc. v. Kim Loan Nguyen (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Jun. 7,
2007)(Taft)[commercial real estate, lease, forcible entry and detainer]
AFFIRM TC JUDGMENT IN PART, REVERSE TC JUDGMENT IN PART, AND REMAND CASE TO TC FOR
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS: Opinion by Justice Taft
Before Chief Justice Radack, Justices Taft and Nuchia
01-04-00586-CV Hong Kong Development, Inc., Hai Du Duong, and Phuong Truong Tu v. Kim Loan Nguyen
d/b/a Alpha Baker
Appeal from Co Civil Ct at Law No 1 of Harris County (Hon. Jack Cagle)
CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE