Lee Joseph Reddic, Sr. v. Larry Reddic

NO. 07-08-0316-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL D
MARCH 25, 2009
______________________________
LEE JOSEPH REDDIC, SR., APPELLANT
V.
LARRY REDDIC, APPELLEE
_________________________________
FROM THE 99TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;
NO. 2006-537,398; HONORABLE WILLIAM C. SOWDER, JUDGE
_______________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.
CONCURRING OPINION
I join in the Court’s opinion and write separately simply to point out another reason
for affirming the trial court’s judgment. As the Court states, all of appellant Lee Joseph
Reddic, Sr.’s issues on appeal focus on the precept that limitations does not begin to run
against a co-tenant until the adverse co-tenant repudiates the co-tenancy. Appellee Larry
Reddic cites Republic Production Co. v. Lee, 132 Tex. 254, 121 S.W.2d 973, 978 (Tex.
1938) for the proposition that a recorded conveyance inconsistent with a non-possessing
co-tenant’s title, followed by possession, may serve to give the co-tenant the required notice
of repudiation. Gossett v. Tidewater Associated Oil Co., 436 S.W.2d 416, 420-21
(Tex.Civ.App.–Tyler 1968, writ ref’d n.r.e.), which the Court cites, recognizes the same
proposition. I believe the trial court’s judgment can be sustained on the basis of those
holdings, apart from the rationale that the property was the sole management community
property of Rose Mae Cotton.
James T. Campbell
Justice
-2-