l3H5-oom~(V
FILED IN COURT OF APPEALS
-cause m 12th Court of Appeals District
REC'D IN COURT OF APPEALS SEP 10 2015,,
12th Court of Anneals District IN THE TYLER TEXAS
PAM ESTES, CLERK
COURT OF APPEALS
PAM ESTES, CLER TYLER, TEXAS 75702
Dixon v Roberts
Orginal proceedings from the
,ih
354"1 Judicial District Court
of Rains County , Texas
the Honorable Richard Beacom, Presiding
Appellants Brief on the Merits
Robert L. Roberts
1260 RS County Rd 1310
Point, Texas 75472
903 816 1753
Pro Se Litigant
IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL
Appellant/Plaintiff: Counsel:
Robert L. Roberts Robert L. Roberts
1260 RS County Rd
1310
Point, Texas, 75472
903 816 1753
Respodent:
The Honorable Richard Beacon
354th Judicial District Court
Emory, Rains County, Texas
Appellaee/Defendant: Councel:
Heather Dixon H. Craig Black
2510 Lee St
Greenville, Texas 75401
TABLE OF CONTENTS
IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2
TABLE OF ATHORITIES 3
STAEMENT OF THE CASE 4
ISSUES PRESENTED 5
STATEMENT OF FACTS 6
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT 9
ARGUMENT 8
PRAYER 10
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Statutes
Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Codes
Section 12.002
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Heather Dixon filed for divorce from Edsel Dixon. She acuses Edsel Dixon
and Robert L. Roberts of conspriring to defraud her by placing a mechanics
lien ,on the house owned by Edsel and Heather Dixon, in the name of Robert
L. Roberts.
ISSUES PRESENTED
Did the trail court err in excluding critical evidence presented at trial?
Is there factually sufficent evidence to support the judgement of the trial
court?
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
In aproximately May of 2007, Edsal and Heather Dixon requested a loan
from Robert L. Roberts, for the purpose of finshing the remodel and addition
on their home. The amount requested was $30,000.00(thirty thousand
dollars.) The loan was to be repaid upon secureing financing to purchase the
house from her (Heather Dixon's) father.
The amount and terms were agreed on by all parties and the funds were
disbursed.
Edsel Dixon presented a Mechanics Lien in the amount of $30,000.00(thirty
thousand dollars) for Robert L. Roberts to sign. This was for the purpose of
funds distrubution at closing . The lien was signed by Robert L. Roberts and
filed in the county clerks office by Edsel Dixon.
When Edsel and Heather Dixon attempted to obtain financing for the
purchase of the house, from her father, they were not able to qualify for an
amount that would cover the mortgage on the house and the amount of the
Mechanic's Lien.
Edsel and Heather Dixon requested that Robert L. Roberts release the lien so
that they could purchase the house and obtain ownership of the property.
It was agreed that Robert L. Roberts was to reappy the Mecanic's Lien, at a
later date.
The date of repayment was not set, as it was to be paid when Edsel and
Heather Dixon were in a positon to refinace the property and optain the
funds to repay the note to Robert L. Roberts.
Edsel Dixon informed Robert L. Roberts that Heather Dixon had filed for a
divorce and recommended that he, Robert L. Roberts, file the mechanics
lien to protect his interest should the court order the property sold. At the
time the lien was filed, the property was owned jointly by Edsel and Heather
Dixon.
SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
The trial judge erred in failing to recognize the joint ownership ofthe
property at the time of the filing of the lien. The property was jointly owed
by Edsel Dixon and Heather Dixon. Therefore there could not have been a
conspiracy between Robert L. Roberts and Edsel Dixon, Mr. dixon can not
conspire against himself. Futhef there could be no intent to cause
Heather Dixon to suffer any physical injury, financial injury, or mental
anguish or emotional distress.
ARGUMENT
During the course of the trial there was testamony given that validated that
the debt was owed and all parties were aware and in agreement prior filing
of the divorce. There was also testimony given, that was in direct conflict
•t
with that of Heather Dixon.
A conspiracy was alleged between Edsel Dixon and Robert L. Roberts
against Heather Dixon, with the filing of the lien. At the time of the filing
the property belonged to both Edsel Dixon and Heather Dixon. She did not
have sole ownership. This fact makes the alligation of a conspiracy null and
void, since Edsel Dixon was also liable for the amount of the lien and a
person can not conspire against oneself.
The court made the judgement in favor of Heather Dixon based on a liablity
under Section 12.002 of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code.
Because Heather Dixon was not the sole owner of the property at the time of
the filing, this section of the code does not apply.
Further the court declared the lien null and void and invalid based on the
format of it being issued for a cash investment. Based on this logic the
origin lienwould also be null and void as well as any release associated with
it
PRAYER
Appellant, Robert L. Roberts, respectfully, for the reasons above request the
court reverse the the judement of the trail court and grant him the full sum of
the original loan amount of $30. 000.00. In addition, due to the extreme
mental, emotional and psychological distressed caused by this action, he
request the court to award him $50,000.00 in damages.
10
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned council certifies that this brief has been served on the
following lead council for all parties to the trial court's order or judgment as
follows
Robert L. Roberts
Pro se
Date served 9-08-2015
Manner served US Mail
H Black
2510 Lee St
Greenville, TX 75701
Repesenting Heather Dixon