Iglesia Hispana Nueva Vida Houston, Inc. v. Adolfo Rosin

Citation: Not availableDocket: 01-06-00048-CV

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; June 7, 2007; Texas; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Res judicata applies only to the specific cause of action filed by the plaintiff. In the case of Iglesia Hispana Nueva Vida Houston, Inc. (Hispana) v. Adolfo Rosin, the appellate court upheld a summary judgment favoring Rosin, as Hispana argued that its claims were not barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel, and contended that material facts existed. However, the court noted that Hispana did not adequately address the issue of collateral estoppel, allowing the summary judgment to be affirmed based on this failure.

The case involves a dispute over property originally purchased by Newlife Church in 1982. Following a merger with the Church of God in 1991, the assets were improperly conveyed, which was later rectified when Rosin executed a warranty deed in 2001 transferring the property to the Church of God. A conflict arose when Melendez, the new minister of the Church of God, attempted to establish a new entity, Hispana, and procured a deed claiming ownership of the property from Bautista, which was recorded after the Church of God’s deed. A previous lawsuit (the "deed litigation") resulted in a default judgment confirming the Church of God’s title. Hispana subsequently filed suit against Rosin, asserting wrongful conveyance of the property without its consent and claiming ownership based on the 1982 purchase.

Hispana alleges that Rosin, its former minister, breached fiduciary duties by transferring property to the Church of God, prompting Hispana to sue him for constructive fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and conversion, along with a request for an accounting of consideration received. Rosin filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting that Hispana's claims are barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel. The court permitted Hispana to depose Rosin, which occurred in November 2004, after which Rosin submitted a no-evidence motion claiming Hispana lacked standing and evidence of consideration received from the deed execution. Hispana countered with affidavits from eight church members disputing Rosin's claim that Bautista merged its assets with the Church of God. The trial court granted summary judgment without detailing its reasoning. Under Texas law, for a traditional summary judgment, the movant must demonstrate no genuine issue of material fact exists, while a no-evidence motion requires the nonmovant to present more than a scintilla of evidence to raise a genuine issue. The court noted that without specified grounds for the summary judgment, Hispana must negate all possible grounds for it to successfully appeal. However, Hispana failed to address the collateral estoppel claim adequately, only mentioning it in the issue heading without further discussion.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed, and all pending motions are dismissed as moot. The panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings and Bland. In the deed litigation involving Melendez and Iglesia Hispana Nueva Vida, the plaintiffs claimed a new trial had been granted by the judge, but no signed order was in the record. They subsequently filed a bill of review, arguing the omission was due to official mistake. The trial court denied the bill of review, stating it intended to overrule the Motion for New Trial by operation of law, confirming the denial was appropriate. Furthermore, there is no evidence that Hispana formally adopted the name "New Life Church" with a government entity. Although an appellant can generally challenge the trial court's summary judgment, Hispana did not make such an assertion. Additionally, Hispana failed to provide substantive discussion regarding collateral estoppel, merely referencing the term in an issue heading that claimed New Life Church's claims were not barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel.