Check Out my Video Short for San Antonio Eviction Lawyer

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney - Trey Wilson Attorney in San Antonio, Texas wrote:

"Retaliation" As a Defense to Eviction

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney - Trey Wilson Attorney in San Antonio, Texas wrote:

Chapter 92 of the Texas Property Code prohibits retaliation by a landlord against a tenant. See TEX. PROP. CODE § 92.331.  Section 92.331(a) provides in part that: 

"[a] landlord may not retaliate against a tenant by taking an action described by Subsection (b) because the tenant. . . in good faith exercises or attempts to exercise against a landlord a right or remedy granted to the tenant by lease, municipal ordinance, or federal or state statute. . . ." 

Subsection (b) provides that the landlord 

"may not, within six months after the date of the tenant's action under subsection (a), retaliate against the tenant" by taking certain actions including filing an eviction proceeding or "engaging, in bad faith, in a course of conduct that materially interferes with the tenant's rights under the tenant's lease." 

See TEX. PROP. CODE ANN. § 92.331(b)(1) & (b)(5)

When a landlord is determined to have filed an eviction action in retaliation for legal conduct of a tenant (as described in the statute), the tenant may recover a civil penalty and attorneys' fees against the landlord. 

Further, retaliation may be asserted by a tenant as an absolute defense in a suit for  eviction.  See TEX. PROP. CODE ANN. § 92.335. 

Crafty tenants often allege retaliation because of the powerful and absolute of this defense. However, under Section 92.332(b), an eviction or lease termination does not constitute retaliation where the tenant is delinquent in rent when the landlord gives notice to vacate or files an eviction action. TEX.PROP.CODE ANN. § 92.332(b)(1) ("an eviction is not retaliation when "the tenant is delinquent in rent when the landlord gives notice to vacate or files an eviction action." Hernandez v. Gallardo, No. 08-12-00178-CV, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 11878, at *12-13 (Tex. App.-El Paso October 29, 2014, pet. denied). 

That is, section 92.332 expressly permits the landlord to file an eviction proceeding for delinquent rent or other material breaches of the lease as provided in section 92.332. See id., §§ 92.331(b)(1) and 92.332.  Accordingly, where a tenant asserts the affirmative defense of retaliation, an eviction court should consider the following:

(i)  the timing of the landlord's issuance of the lease termination or notice of eviction; and

(ii)  the status of the tenant's payment obligations at that time.

If the landlord can demonstrate that the tenant owed rent or was otherwise in default at the time that the notice to vacate is issued, then the tenant most often cannot carry his burden under the affirmative defense of retaliation.  See Moore vs. Hurtado, __ S.W. 3d Memorandum Opinion -- (Tex.App. -- Amarillo  June 16, 2015)

San Antonio Apartment Tenants told to stop paying rent, then to Vacate?

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney -- Trey Wilson San Antonio wrote: Here's an interesting eviction/ landlord-tenant story from KSAT.com

Tenants instructed to stop paying rent being forced from apartments

SAN ANTONIO - South Point Oaks Apartments residents are baffled about the future of their living situation after receiving notices the residential property has been sold and that they must leave.

“It's where I call home for right now,” said James Prince, who has lived at the apartments near Loop 410 and Babcock Road for three years.

On May 7, tenants received a notice from Fairway Properties saying the apartments had changed ownership. The letter instructed residents to “refrain from paying rent to anyone until you receive a notice from the new owner or management company.”

On May 24, tenants received an eviction notice stating they had 72 hours to leave.

“Three weeks ago you tell us stop paying rent and we don't pay rent,” said Prince. “Now you're telling us we have to leave."

Read the full story HERE

When 3 days is Not Enough Notice - Notice to Vacate/Notice to Quit

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

Usually by the time a landlord brings an eviction matter to me,  she has already issued a Notice to Vacate to the tenant. Most often, this Notice provides the tenant with 3 days to move, failing which, they will be evicted.

Unfortunately, however, 3 days is not always sufficient time for a notice to vacate under Texas law.

Texas Property Code Section 24.005 provides the requirements of a Notice to Vacate. This law holds:

(a) If the occupant is a tenant under a written lease or oral rental agreement, the landlord must give a tenant who defaults or holds over beyond the end of the rental term or renewal period at least three days' written notice to vacate the premises before the landlord files a forcible detainer suit, unless the parties have contracted for a shorter or longer notice period in a written lease or agreement.

(b) If the occupant is a tenant at will or by sufferance, the landlord must give the tenant at least three days' written notice to vacate before the landlord files a forcible detainer suit unless the parties have contracted for a shorter or longer notice period in a written lease or agreement. 

Obviously, this statute does NOT apply to the following non-exhaustive set of circumstances:

• A monthly (month-to-month) tenant who has not breached;
• Some former owners who have lost the property to foreclosure; or
• A tenant who has not breached a lease agreement or held over (but for who the landlord desires to terminate occupancy).

Since proper notice to vacate is JURISDICTIONAL, a court CANNOT order a tenant to vacate or surrender possession if a landlord has not supplied proper notice. As such, if the notice required in a given landlord-tanant or occupancy situation is unclear, the property owner should contact an experienced eviction lawyer.

Former Owners Increasingly Refuse to Vacate Following Foreclosure Sale -- New Owners Forced to Evict

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

Sadly, my San Antonio evictions practice frequently involves the filing of FE&D suits to remove former owners from homes they lost through a foreclosure and the attendant sale on the Courthouse steps. My client is almost always an innocent third party who purchased the property at the foreclosure /Substitute Trustee's Sale, but cannot take possession because the former owner refuses to vacate.

Theses cases are never fun, and I feel bad for the former owner.  However, I find a little solace in the fact that the former owners have a set of remedies available to them. Further, those remedies are not against the new owner, but rather, against the bank or other lender who posted the home for foreclosure, and ultimately sold it to the new owner (my client).

It seems like lately, more often than ever, the former owners are fighting the evictions -- which the new owner rarely loses based upon the Substitute Trustee's Deed evidencing the change in ownership.  When the former owner is unsuccessful in stopping or defeating the eviction, he or she frequently "lawyers-up" and runs to District Court to file a new lawsuit and obtain a Temporary Restraining Order that prevents the Eviction Judgment from being carried out.  

Invariably, the new suits allege all sorts of misdeeds on the part of the lender who foreclosed, allege that the foreclosure was invalid, and seek a court declaration that the sale to the new owner is invalid and should be reversed. 

When neither the new owner nor the lender who foreclosed are Texas residents, these suits usually end-up in federal court.  Yes -- eviction suits wind up becoming "federal cases."

Increasingly, it seems that the Judges -- both state and federal -- are now recognizing that the new owner had nothing to do with the mortgage loan, how it was serviced, or whether the lender violated some law in conducting the sale. Instead, the new owner is just somebody who spent their money and received nothing in return but a lawsuit. In light of this recognition, we are achieving a large degree of success in obtaining possession of the property for the new owner, notwithstanding the fact that the "wrongful foreclosure" lawsuit against the lender remains pending.

Purchasers of real properties on the Bexar County courthouse steps who find themselves wrapped-up in a wrongful foreclosure suit against a foreclosing lender are well advised to hire an experienced eviction lawyer.

83 Year Old New Hampshire Woman Facing Eviction

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:  Here's an eviction story from New Hampshire that is making national news.

83-year-old NH woman awaits court eviction ruling

By LYNNE TUOHY, Associated Press |

ALSTEAD, N.H. (AP) — Shelley Crosby — with no legal training but plenty of passion — stood before the justices of New Hampshire's highest court arguing why her 83-year-old mother should not be evicted from the modest Alstead trailer she has called home for nearly 30 years.

"Thank you for giving me this opportunity to fight for my mom," she began at the November hearing.

Crosby, who researched the Supreme Court's rules at the library because she doesn't have a computer, hopes for a reprieve for her mother, Leona Berger, in her two-year battle with the cooperative that operates the 20-unit trailer park.

The justices did not say when they would issue a ruling in the case that is the talk of this small town of 2,000 residents just north of Keene.

The board of selectmen even held up approval of a $400,000 grant for a well system at the trailer park for nearly half a year hoping to leverage a deal with the Well Hill Cooperative to keep Berger in her home. The board abandoned that fight this week.

"I thought I had the opportunity to use the bully pulpit a little," board Chairman Mike Jasmin said Tuesday. He said all he asked is that the cooperative give Berger the opportunity to buy the trailer she has restored and rented for more than 28 years.

"Nobody's asking for Leona to get a free ride, just tell her the price of admission," Jasmin said.

Berger's ordeal began in August 2011, when she received notice that the board was going to increase her rent from $400 to $900. Crosby became her mother's advocate and negotiated the rent to $575. Berger had to sign a lease for the first time — a lease the board opted not to renew a year later. They sent an eviction notice instead, effective September 2012.

Crosby and her mother hired a lawyer to fight the eviction at the district court level, where a judge ruled the board had the right to obtain and sell the rental property. Crosby took over when their lawyer declined to appeal the ruling.

The Supreme Court at first rejected her petition to appeal, but she successfully filed a motion for reconsideration in March

At the hearing, Supreme Court justices were incredulous that the cooperative's board of directors first tried to more than double Berger's rent, then sent her an eviction notice without giving her an opportunity to buy the trailer or extend her lease. The lawyer for the cooperative's board of directors said it was a business decision.

"They can't sell it with her in it," lawyer William Pribis told the justices at the Nov. 13 hearing.

"They could sell it to her — that would be very efficient," said Chief Justice Linda Dalianis.

Robert Phinney, chairman of the Well Hill board of directors, said media reports that he wants Berger out of the park are "totally off-base."

"It's a business decision, so the park doesn't have responsibility for taking care of the house anymore," Phinney said Tuesday. He wouldn't say why the board hasn't offered Berger a chance to buy the house.

Crosby says the board is "bullying" her mother.

"I don't think Rob Phinney ever, ever anticipated he was barking up the wrong tree when he started barking up mine," Crosby said.

Crosby said Tuesday the stress is making her mother ill.

Berger — seated in her living room weeks after the arguments — said the legal fight "has taken years off my life. That's what makes me want to scream."

Berger and her husband, Bernard — a tractor-trailer driver — transformed the trailer's lot into a landscaped lawn and refurbished its dilapidated interior, Berger said. When he died 14 years ago, it reinforced her attachment to her home.

"We bought everything to fit this house," she said. "It's almost like I've been here forever."

Handling Eviction Appeals in San Antonio, Bexar County, Texas -- What Happens Behind the Scenes

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

Many times, a tenant who has lost an eviction case in the Justice Court will file an appeal. The right of appeal is automatic, and can be exercised in any case, irrespective of the merits of the appeal, the facts of the case, or the true intentions of the appealing party.  All the losing tenant is required to do is file a notice of appeal within 5 days of the JP's Judgment being entered, and either execute an Appeal Bond, or file a "Pauper's Affidavit" (Affidavit of Inability to Pay).  

Once these things occur, the Tenant is entitled to a Trial De Novo (Latin for "new trial") in the Bexar County Court at Law ("CCL"). Trial De Novo means that the CCL will proceed exactly as if the first trial never occurred. Thus, there is no appellate standard governing whether some error or injustice occurred in the JP trial, but rather, the County Court Judge views the case like a fresh, new case, and does not consider any findings made by the JP.  Further, the Tenant may (and frequently does) improve his or her arguments and/or evidence during the 2nd, new trial.

I have long been highly critical of the effectiveness of the Trial De Novo right of appeal, the ease with which an appeal may be brought, and the frequency with which unmeritorious appeals are filed solely to occasion delay (and at great expense and loss to the Landlord/Property Owner/Property Manager). Nevertheless, we are all left with the fact that an appeal with a Trial De Novo is an absolute right granted to any party unhappy with the Justice Court's decision in an eviction case.

Due to changes in the Eviction Rules, many of my Owner and property management clients are handling their eviction/FE & D trials "in-house" and without legal counsel. However, once an appeal is filed, the law prohibiting the practice of law by non-lawyers kicks in, and the files are routed to me to dispose of a tenant's eviction appeal.  Here's what happens from there.

Once an appeal of an FE & D / Eviction Judgement is filed in Bexar County, Texas, here's what happens:

1)  The Clerk of the Justice Court will MAIL (U.S.P.S.) the file ("transcript") to the Bexar County Clerk.  This may take several days or sometimes weeks.

2)  Once the Bexar County Clerk receives the "transcript" from the Justice Court, they will determine whether the case is one filed upon an "Appeal Bond," or a "Pauper's Affidavit."  If the case is one upon an Appeal Bond, the County Clerk WILL NOT assign a Cause Number or Court to the case unless and until somebody pays the court costs.  

3)  The County Clerk will send a letter to the Appellant advising them that the "transcript" has been received, that an Answer should be filed, and that Court costs must be paid. The letter will also specify that the appeal will be dismissed if the costs are not paid within 21 days.

4)  If the Appeal is one upon a "Pauper's Affidavit," then the Justice Court Clerk will issue a "Written Notice" that the "Pauper's Appeal" has been filed. The Notice is intended to comply with property Code Section 24.0053 (payment of rent during an appeal), and lists the amounts, including an initial  deposit, that the tenant must pay during the pendency of the appeal.  If these amounts are not timely paid, then the Tenant is in Default, and the appeal is subject to dismissal (upon a written Motion to Dismiss filed by the Landlord/owner/Appellee).

5) Assuming that the court costs are paid to the County Clerk or (in the event of a Pauper's Appeal) the initial deposit and rents are paid to the court registry, then the appeal is assigned a Cause Number and a Court by the Bexar County Clerk.

6)  Then -- and here's the part that most Appellee/landlord/Owner/Property Managers don't comprehend -- ABSOLUTELY NOTHING HAPPENS.  That is, the Appeal sits there, on the Court's docket, languishing in inactivity, until somebody takes appropriate steps to set the case for trial.  Obviously,in a Non-Payment of Rent Appeal, the tenant who is living in the property and hasn't paid rent in months has no incentive to do this.  Truth is, the non-rent-paying Tenant virtually never sets their appeal for trial, because they do not really want another losing day in Court. Thus, it is incumbent on the Owner/landlord/Appellee -- or their lawyer -- to shepherd the eviction appeal through the County Court at Law as quick as possible.  This does not happen automatically or without a familiarity as to when and where to file and set requests for Court action.

7)  One a proper written Motion is made, an eviction appeal is subject to preferential treatment, and trial may be scheduled to occur in as few as 8 days after the date that the transcript has been received from the Justice Court. Again, however, getting the proper Motion filed and set for hearing-- with notice served upon the Appellant -- is up to the Appellee/ Owner/Landlord.

8)  Once the Appeal is presented to the CCL for trial, a Final Judgment must be prepared and presented to the Court for entry. Unlike the JP Court, the CCL does not have pre-printed template Judgments. Instead, the party seeking the Judgment is required to prepare and present one for the Court's consideration.

Unlike the Justice Court's procedure for automatically setting a trial in an eviction case upon filing the Complaint, noting in the Bexar County Court at Law is automatic. Likewise, nothing is quick. For these reasons, and so many others, a Landlord, Owner or Property Manager who finds themselves facing a Tenant's eviction appeal should consider hiring a lawyer who is experienced with the Bexar County Court at Law's procedures.

Eviction Lawsuit Papers Must be Sworn/Verified

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

It is imperative that the Landlord's Petition filed in an eviction suit be sworn, with the Plaintiff or his agent testifying that the contents are true and correct.

This requirement is found in two places in Texas law, and failure to verify a Petition can result in dismissal of an eviction suit, which extends the period of time that a bad tenant can remain in the property.

First, Section 24.0051(a) of the Texas Property Code provides: "In a suit filed in justice court in which the landlord files a sworn statement seeking judgment against a tenant for possession of the premises and unpaid rent, [proper] service on the tenant... is procedurally sufficient to support a default judgment for possession of the premises and unpaid rent." 

The flip side of this coin is that, in the event that a tenant/defendant makes default in the eviction suit, an unsworn petition does not constitute sufficient evidence to support a Judgment. Rather, Judgment in those circumstances can only be supported by live, sworn testimony given by the Plaintiff/landlord.  Texas Justice Court judges are understandably irritated with the notion of having to accept testimony (and essentially conduct a trial) when the tenant didn't even bother to file an Answer or show up for Court. At least one Bexar County JP will not accept evidence from the landlord where the tenant makes default.

New Rule of Civil Procedure 510.3(a) also, very plainly, requires that eviction Petitions be sworn.

Requirements for Notice to Vacate - Notice to Quit

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

Typically, an eviction may not proceed in Texas unless and until a proper Notice to Vacate has been delivered to a tenant, squatter or other occupant in possession of real property.

Section 24.005 of the Texas Property Code  governs notices to vacate (sometimes called a "Notice to Quit," "NTV" or "NTQ").  That section is actually called "Notice to Vacate Prior to Filing Eviction Suit," and could be accurately characterized as a jurisdictional statute because it requires delivery of a proper notice before a suit can be filed.

At the time of hearing /trial in the eviction suit, the Judge will ask to see a copy of the NTV and expect some evidence concerning the time and manner of its delivery. In San Antonio's eviction courts (the Bexar County Justice of the Peace courts), Judges routinely DISMISS cases where the landlord is unable to demonstrate compliance with the notice requirements of Section 24.005.  

Section 24.005 also prescribes the contents, time and manner of delivery of the Notice to Vacate to the tenant, or other occupant of the property, including persons who have entered the property without the consent of the person in actual possession of the property or a tenant of the property (though in these "forcible entry" cases notice can be oral).

Generally, where a tenant occupies a property under an unexpired written or verbal Lease Agreement, the requirements of the Notice to Vacate are:

1.  Written Notice;

2.  Delivered to the Tenant at least 3 days before an eviction suit is filed; and

3.  Delivered by mail (regular, registered or certified) or in person (by personal delivery to the tenant or any person 16 or over who resides at the premises AND affixing the notice to the INSIDE of the main entry door) at the premises in question. 

These requirement change if the lease is expired and the tenant is "holding over," or where the Lease provides for a longer notice period, or in instances where there is no mailbox (and a keyless bolt device, alarm system or dangerous animal).

Special Rules Apply to TENANTS of Foreclosed Properties -- Proceed Carefully with Evictions

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

In a previous post, I touched on the process for evicting former owners of residential properties who remained on the premises after the cessation (through Trustee's Sale) of their ownership.  In those circumstances, former owners are generally not entitled to any special protections.  

Tenants of those owners, however, have multiple layers of protection that must be considered when contemplating a post-foreclosure eviction.  These layers arise from both federal and Texas state law.

The federal law, known as the "Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009," (referred to herein as "PFTA") became effective on May 20, 2009 and remains in force until December 31, 2014 under its own "sunsetting provision."  The Act will likely be extended by further federal action.

The Texas state law is found in Section 24.005(b), and currently has no expiration date. The state law relates to the amount of notice a tenant is entitled to before they are required to vacate. It  provides (in relevant part) as follows:  

(b)  ... If a building is purchased at a tax foreclosure sale or a trustee's foreclosure sale under a lien superior to the tenant's lease and the tenant timely pays rent and is not otherwise in default under the tenant's lease after foreclosure, the purchaser must give a residential tenant of the building at least 30 days' written notice to vacate if the purchaser chooses not to continue the lease. The tenant is considered to timely pay the rent under this subsection if, during the month of the foreclosure sale, the tenant pays the rent for that month to the landlord before receiving any notice that a foreclosure sale is scheduled during the month or pays the rent for that month to the foreclosing lienholder or the purchaser at foreclosure not later than the fifth day after the date of receipt of a written notice of the name and address of the purchaser that requests payment.

See Texas Property Code Section 24.005(b).

The PFTA, by contrast, requires that in the case of most foreclosures, the successor owner takes title to the property subject to (i) an obligation to give a BONA FIDE TENANT at least 90 days for any notice to vacate; and (ii) the rights of a BONA FIDE TENANT to occupy the property until the expiration of a lease existing at the time the notice of foreclosure is posted (unless the new owner plans to occupy the property as his primary residence).

The PFTA contains a specific definition of BONA FIDE TENANT, and that term is key to whether the federal law's protections apply.

An Owner or Manager faced with existing tenants following a foreclosure sale would be wise to contact an experienced eviction attorney to analyze those tenants' rights to continued occupancy or possession of the property.  Acts in violation of federal law could result in penalties or damages being asserted by the tenant against the Owner or Manager.  

HUD has issued a helpful explanatory Notice relating to the PFTA. 

Can a Property Manager Represent a Landlord in an Eviction Lawsuit?

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

***THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS POST HAS BEEN SUPERSEDED BY NEW TEXAS RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 500.4, EFFECTIVE 8/31/13.**** 

San Antonio Texas Real Estate Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

Many Texas residential property managers offer eviction-related services to their owner-clients. Frequently, these services are  limited to issuing Notices to Vacate/ Notices to Quit and rent demand letters, occasionally, a tenant will require a Court order  before he or she vacates a rental premises. When this occurs, it is important to understand the parameters within which non-lawyer property managers in Texas can represent their owner-clients' interests in Court.

Generally, only a licensed attorney can represent another person's, or any corporation's, interests in court in Texas.  See Section 83.001(a) of the Texas Government Code, which  prohibits a person, other than a member of the state bar from practicing law.  

However, an exception to this general rule exists in connection with some types of  EVICTION cases filed in the JUSTICE COURTS. This exception is found in two separate places in the law:

Texas Property Code Sec. 24.011.  NONLAWYER REPRESENTATION. In eviction suits in justice court for nonpayment of rent or holding over beyond a rental term, the parties may represent themselves or be represented by their authorized agents, who need not be attorneys. In any eviction suit in justice court, an authorized agent requesting or obtaining a default judgment need not be an attorney.

Texas Rules of Civil Procedure: RULE 747a. REPRESENTATION BY AGENTS. In forcible entry and detainer cases for non-payment of rent or holding over beyond the rental term, the parties may represent themselves, or be represented by their authorized agents in justice courts.

In all other types of eviction cases (i.e. non-monetary defaults or breach of Lease cases, the Owner can represent him/herself, but he/she cannot be represented by a property manager, unless that manager is also a licensed attorney.  

Further, because an appeal of a Judgment entered in an eviction suit is taken to the County Court at Law, a non-lawyer may not represent the owner's interests on appeal.

As with any power, just because you "have" it, does not always mean you should exercise it. Whether a manager hires an attorney in the early stage of the eviction process, versus saving the funds and attempting to prosecute an eviction themselves, is one that should be made after careful deliberation, and on a case-by-case basis.

Texas Supreme Court Adopts New Rules for Justice Courts, Abolishes Small Claims Courts

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

In accordance with a law passed last legislative session (82nd Session, 2011), the Texas Supreme Court on February 12, 2013, adopted a Miscellaneous Order (No. 13-9023) that ABOLISHES the Small Claims Court as of May 1, 2013, and REPEALS a broad swath of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure (Rules 523-591 and 737-755) and a statute from the Texas Property Code (Section 92. 0563(d)). 

The repealed Rules are replaced by newly-adopted Rules 500-510 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, which will govern cases filed on or after May 1, 2013, as well as cases pending on that day.

The legislation mandating the changes, HB 79,  had far-reaching implications on the judiciary, and has been called a "major court reorganization bill."  Only a small -- yet very important -- part of the new law impacts landlord-tenant lawsuits in the Texas justice courts.

Of particular importance to this blog are the new rules governing eviction proceedings (Rules 500-507 and 510) and those governing "repair and remedy cases" in which a tenant alleges that a landlord has failed to repair a condition required by Chapter 92 of the Texas Property Code (Rules 500-507 and 509).

When time permits, I will post detailed explanations of the new Rules, and how they are different from the soon-to-be-abolished Rules governing eviction cases until April 31, 2013.

We've moved our office -- Drop By and Say Hello

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer - Bexar County Eviction Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

Trey Wilson has moved his law practice to 111 W. Olmos Dr., San Antonio, Texas 78212. Phone, fax and email will remain the same.

Cockroaches Lead to Eviction in Brownsville?

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer Trey Wilson wrote:

A Brownsville family who reported their landlord's failure to fumigate for roaches to a local TV station now find themselves facing eviction. The landlord claims that they failed to pay rent, but they seem to have receipts showing payment.

Watch the disgusting video here.

Another "Celebrity" Eviction: Heidi Fleiss evicted from Las Vegas pet grooming business

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer Trey Wilson wrote: Yet another "celebrity" eviction

Heidi Fleiss has been ordered to vacate her Las Vegas pet grooming business.

The former "Hollywood madam" was served with an eviction notice on November 21 by the landlord of the building where she houses her Dirty Dog Laundry shop, claiming that she had fallen behind on rent and turned the property into "a dump".

However, according to TMZ, Fleiss has yet to leave the premises and insisted that she has not been there in months. Fleiss said that she allowed a friend to look after the business after she gave up on it in order to move back to Los Angeles.

The building's landlord has reportedly revealed plans to clean out the property himself if Fleiss does not leave of her own accord.

Courtney Love Being Evicted from Posh NY Apartment -- Behind on $27,000 Monthly Rent?

Courtney Love asks judge to toss West Village landlord's eviction bid - NYPOST.com

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer Trey Wilson wrote: Another one for the "Celebrity" eviction file...

Really???? Courtney Love has a $27,000 a month apartment in New York? I don't even know what she does anymore, other than be the widow of Kurt Cobain (about which she is apparently writing a book). In any event, her landlord says she's behind in her $27,000/month rent.

Defending An Eviction Appeal Based Upon A Pauper's Affidavit

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer Trey Wilson wrote:

It is a sad fact that many Tenants facing eviction are "pros" at living rent free for as long as possible. As a lawyer with an active eviction practice in San Antonio, my Landlord clients have all-too-often been deflated when a Tenant appeals an eviction Judgment using a pauper's affidavit. Frequently, such an appeal adds insult to injury and results in additional time with a non-paying Tenant living in the property.

Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 749a provides:

If appellant is unable to pay the costs of appeal, or file a bond as required by Rule 749, he shall nevertheless be entitled to appeal by making strict proof of such inability within five days after the judgment is signed, which shall consist of his affidavit filed with the justice of the peace stating his inability to pay such costs, or any part thereof, or to give security...

Tenants familiar with the process will frequently use this Rule to appeal a Judgment granting a Landlord possession of the rental premises, and do so for FREE. They know how the "game" is played, and frequently know that operation of Rule 749b allows a tenant/appellant who has appealed by filing a pauper's affidavit in a nonpayment of rent forcible detainer case a "to stay in possession of the premises during the pendency of the appeal."

In plain English, this means that the Tenant who properly files an appeal using a Pauper's Affidavit can remain in the property until the appeal is decided by the County Court at Law. Often, they remain in the rental property even though they may have not paid rent in months, and even though the Justice Court already ruled that they are not entitled to possession! This arrangement absolutely gives rise to abuses, and, in my opinion, needs to be changed!

Fortunately, however, a tenant/appellant's right to stay in the property during the appeal is not absolute. Rule 749b provides for certain conditions that must be met in order for the tenant to retain possession. Two very important obligations involve the payment of rents that come due during the appeal.

(1) Within 5 days of the date that the tenant/appellant files his pauper's affidavit, he must pay into the justice court registry one rental period's rent (generally one month) under the terms of the rental agreement; and

(2) During the appeal process as rent becomes due under the rental agreement, the tenant/appellant shall pay the rent into the county court registry within five days of the due date under the terms of the rental agreement.

Notably, a Landlord can withdraw any or all rent in the county court registry -- even while the appeal is pending -- upon presenting a sworn motion and having a hearing before the County Court at Law Judge.

Rule 749b also provides Remedies to a Landlord when the Tenant/Appellee fails to pay rent during the appeal (as described above). Specifically, if the tenant/appellant fails to pay the rent into the court registry within the prescribed time limits, the Landlord/appellee may file a "notice of default" in county court. Upon sworn motion by the appellee and a showing of default to the judge, the court shall issue a writ of restitution, which gives IMMEDIATE possession of the property to a Landlord.

Very often, a tenant familiar with this process is able to "pull a fast one" by appealing with a Pauper's Affidavit, and then never paying any rent or actively prosecuting the appeal. This inevitably results in an extended, free stay in the property, and financial harm to the Landlord.

A vigilant Landlord should be aware of the strict procedural and time requirements related to eviction appeals, and consider hiring an attorney with experience in the eviction and eviction appeal processes. An astute attorney can minimize the additional financial losses attributable to a deadbeat Tenant who abuses the Pauper's Affidavit appeals process.

Eviction Leads to Fugitive's Arrest

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer Trey Wilson wrote:

Deputies with the Cecil County, MD Sheriff's Office stumbled upon a fugitive while providing security during a landlord's eviction of a tenant. Apparently, the tenant had allowed the fugitive to live there.

After receiving a tip from federal agents, investigators with the Cecil County Sheriff's Office captured Henry Joseph Harper Holder, 34. Holder is an alleged drug dealer wanted by the U.S. Marshals Office. Holder is wanted in Newport News, Va., where he is facing numerous drug charges, including manufacturing controlled dangerous substances and possession of morphine.

The events leading to Holder's capture started on Thursday morning when deputies provided security in the 100 block of Willow Drive for a scheduled eviction. "This is something we do when there is a scheduled eviction. It's to prevent anyone from interfering while the landlord is removing (the tenant's) property."

After the eviction, an agent with the U.S. Marshals Office called sheriff's investigators and reported that Holder had been living at the home where the eviction had taken place, police said. The agent, who provided other tips, too, asked investigators to arrest Holder, police added.

No Writs Out of JP 2 During the Christmas Season!

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer Trey Wilson wrote:

This sign was posted at JP Precinct 2 today!

Excellent Landlord Tenant Guide Now Available

San Antonio Eviction Lawyer Trey Wilson wrote:

Please click the link below for an excellent resource compiled by Judon Fambrough of the Texas A & M Real Estate Center. Mr. Fambrough is a distinguished real estate law expert, and has written many publications upon which I rely in my daily practice. This guide provides easily-digestible summaries of the Texas Property Code sections applicable to landlords and tenants:

Landlords and Tenants Guide