Dallas Jury Rejects 30-Year Adverse Possession Claim, Upholds Family Inheritance Rights

DALLAS, TEXAS – A Dallas County jury has ruled that 30 years of occupancy cannot trump blood inheritance, confirming that Dee King retain his ownership interest of property at 2607 Kingston Street despite decades-long adverse possession claims.

The case centered on a property owned by the late J.D. King, who died in 1993, and his wife Thelma King, who died in 1996. After the Kings' deaths, the property remained occupied by Linda Pahcheka-Valdez and Francisco Valdez, who had initially moved onto the property in 1992 as tenants under an arrangement with Sonia Ybarra, the Kings' power of attorney and neighbor.

Dee King, a retired electrician from Fayetteville, Arkansas, learned of his inheritance only in 2021 when he was added as a defendant in the case. King is the grandson of J.D. King through his father, Elyon Dee King, who had been abandoned by J.D. as a child and had no knowledge of the Dallas property before his death in February 2021.

The legal dispute arose when the Valdez family filed a quiet title action seeking ownership through adverse possession. However, the evidence showed that their occupancy began with explicit permission and continued under various rental arrangements, including paying property taxes in lieu of rent.

"This verdict protects the fundamental principle that inheritance rights cannot be lost simply because family members are unaware of property owned by deceased relatives," said Julie Pettit of The Pettit Law Firm, who represented Dee King along with co-counsel David Urteago. "The jury recognized that permission-based occupancy cannot transform into ownership, regardless of how long it continues."

During trial, testimony from the plaintiffs themselves confirmed they would have left if asked by the original owners and that they paid some King heirs for their interests, acknowledging they did not own the property through adverse possession.

"The plaintiffs' own admissions demonstrated they understood they were there with permission, not as owners," said co-counsel David Urteago. "You cannot convert permission into ownership simply by staying long enough."

The case highlighted that Texas law requires adverse possession to be "hostile" to the true owner's rights, but the Valdez family's occupancy began and continued with permission. The verdict reinforces Texas property law protections for inheritance rights and sends a clear message about the limits of adverse possession claims.

The jury also awarded attorneys’ fees to Dee King in connection with defending his property rights.

For more information, contact: Julie Pettit, The Pettit Law Firm, (214) 329-1846, jpettit@pettitfirm.com