Texas couple lose possession of 70 acres after man’s mother excluded him from her will; appeals

Texas couple lose possession of 70 acres after man's mother excluded him from her will; appeals

William’s mother excluded him from her will, which included her share of the land. (Representational photo)

A Texas couple who had been living on 70 acres of land they said had belonged to their family for decades have lost their fight to keep possession of the property. William Dan Moss and his wife, Brenda Moss, had challenged an eviction order after a dispute that began with William being left out of his mother’s will. A Texas appeals court ruled against the couple on Thursday, allowing the earlier eviction judgment to stand.

How the dispute over the 70 acres unfolded

On March 9, both sides presented their arguments. The first major setback for William came when he challenged his mother’s will in a Hunt County court. The court rejected his claim He then approached a district court in Hopkins County, this time seeking a ruling in his favour over the land itself. But that attempt ended with another judgment against him. William did not appeal the decision. The local justice court agreed with Lawrence and awarded him possession. The Mosses then appealed to the Hopkins County Court at Law. The couple represented themselves during the proceedings and chose to have a jury hear the case. But again, the jury decided that the Garner Heir Group had the stronger right to possess the property. The Mosses continued their challenge, taking the dispute to the Sixth Court of Appeals in Texas.

William’s mother had owned a share of the land, but when she died, her will specifically excluded him from inheriting her estate, according to the details of the case available on Justia . The property is located in Sulphur Springs, Hopkins County. William disagreed with that decision and took the matter to court. His challenge was unsuccessful, but the disagreement over the land did not end there. What followed was a series of court proceedings over who had the right to remain on the property.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *