## Facts

- In 1926, W. T. Carter Lumber & Building Company recorded a plat and dedicatory instrument for the “Garden Villas” development in Harris County, Texas, dedicating certain tracts to the public for parks and other public purposes, as shown on an attached map.
- The instrument included a reservation providing that if, on or after 25 years from the dedication date, any tract dedicated for parks or other listed public uses “cease to be used” for the indicated purpose, fee title would “vest” in Carter.
- Lawyers Trust Company later succeeded to Carter’s reserved interest and claimed the benefit of the reservation.
- The City of Houston used the tract in dispute as a public park for a period, but the tract was found to have ceased being used and to have been abandoned as a park on and after August 12, 1951 (25 years after the dedication).
- Lawyers Trust filed a trespass-to-try-title action in 1959 against the City and against R. N. Ferguson (later substituted by Mrs. Minnie Lucille Anderson), who claimed title under Texas’s 10-year statute of limitations.
- The trial court directed a verdict against Anderson on limitations and, based on jury findings of nonuse and abandonment after August 12, 1951, rendered judgment for Lawyers Trust.
- The court of civil appeals reversed, and the Texas Supreme Court granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether the dedication and reservation created a fee simple determinable (automatic reverter) or a fee simple subject to condition subsequent (right of entry).
2. If a fee subject to condition subsequent was created, whether the cessation of park use triggered the condition and whether Lawyers Trust could enforce the right of entry by filing suit in 1959.
3. Whether the limitations claimant (Anderson) acquired title under the Texas 10-year statute of limitations.

## Decision

- The Texas Supreme Court held the instrument created a fee simple subject to condition subsequent in the City, with a right of entry in the dedicating owner and its successor.
- The Court upheld the jury’s findings that on and after August 12, 1951, the tract ceased to be used and was abandoned for park purposes, satisfying the condition.
- The Court held Lawyers Trust effectively exercised the right of entry by filing the trespass-to-try-title action and was entitled to recover the property.
- The Court reversed the court of civil appeals and reinstated the trial court’s judgment for Lawyers Trust.
- The directed verdict against Anderson on the 10-year limitations claim was left undisturbed.

## Legal Principles

- A dedication instrument reserving title to the dedicating owner upon later cessation of a specified public use may be construed as creating a fee simple subject to condition subsequent, not an automatic termination.
- A right of entry (power of termination) does not divest the grantee automatically upon breach; it must be affirmatively exercised by the holder of the future interest.
- Filing a suit to recover title and possession (including trespass to try title) can constitute an effective exercise of a right of entry following a condition subsequent.
- When a jury finds cessation of the dedicated use and abandonment after the stated time period, that finding can establish occurrence of the condition for purposes of enforcing the right of entry.

## Conclusion

The Texas Supreme Court ruled that the City held the dedicated park tract subject to a condition subsequent and that, once park use ceased after the 25-year period, the dedicating owner’s successor could retake title by exercising the right of entry through a trespass-to-try-title lawsuit, warranting judgment for Lawyers Trust.


Lawyers Tr. Co. v. City of Houston, 359 S.W.2d 887 (Tex. 1962)