Stacey McElvain vs. Jason Stokes, et al

Rules

• Rule 84.04

  Rule 84.04

  cited

Cases

• brasher v craig 483 sw3d 446

  Brasher v. Craig, 483 S.W.3d 446

  cited
• daniels kerr v crosby 484 sw3d 798

  Daniels-Kerr v. Crosby, 484 S.W.3d 798

  cited
• ferguson v hoffman 462 sw3d 776

  Ferguson v. Hoffman, 462 S.W.3d 776

  cited
• houston v crider 317 sw3d 178

  Houston v. Crider, 317 S.W.3d 178

  cited
• langston v langston 615 sw3d 109

  Langston v. Langston, 615 S.W.3d 109

  cited
• llc v jensen 600 sw3d 16

  LLC v. Jensen, 600 S.W.3d 16

  cited
• murphy v carron 536 sw2d 30

  Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30

  cited
• murphy v holman 289 sw3d 234

  Murphy v. Holman, 289 S.W.3d 234

  cited
• properties v merrell 489 sw3d 860

  Properties v. Merrell, 489 S.W.3d 860

  cited
• sauvain v acceptance indem ins co 437 sw3d 296

  Sauvain v. Acceptance Indem. Ins. Co., 437 S.W.3d 296

  cited
• watson v mense 298 sw3d 521

  Watson v. Mense, 298 S.W.3d 521

  cited

1. Issue: Whether appellants' points challenging the trial court's findings of actual and hostile possession were properly preserved for appellate review under Rule 84.04.

   No, appellants failed to comply with Rule 84.04 briefing requirements for "not-supported-by-substantial-evidence" challenges, thus preserving nothing for review.

2. Issue: Whether the trial court's findings that McElvain proved the actual and hostile elements of adverse possession were supported by substantial evidence.

   Yes, the record demonstrates substantial evidence supports the trial court's findings of actual and hostile possession.

   Standard of review: no substantial evidence