Dione Childress v. Alex S. Tradd II, as Independent Executor of the Estate of Robert Carson Caldwell

No. 03-24-00319-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 19, 2026) · Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, Austin · March 19, 2026 · No. No. 03-24-00319-CV

Summary

The Texas Court of Appeals for the Third District affirmed a probate court judgment in favor of the independent executor of Robert Carson Caldwell’s estate on a conversion claim against Dione Childress. The court held that the executor conclusively established the elements of conversion through summary-judgment evidence and deemed admissions, and that Childress failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact. The court also held that the probate court did not abuse its discretion by denying Childress’s motion for continuance.

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, Austin
Writing for the Court
Chari L. Kelly; Chief Justice Byrne; Justice Triana; Justice Kelly
Jurisdiction
Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, Austin
Decision date
March 19, 2026
Docket number
No. 03-24-00319-CV
Procedural posture
Appeal from a probate court's final judgment incorporating an interlocutory summary judgment on an estate's conversion claim and dismissing Childress's counterclaim for caretaker back pay with prejudice.
Standard of review
Summary judgment is reviewed de novo, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant. A ruling on a motion for continuance is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
Published memorandum opinion
Parties
Dione Childress v. Alex S. Tradd II, as Independent Executor of the Estate of Robert Carson Caldwell
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

summary judgmentprobate procedureconversionappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

ProbateCivil procedureAppellate procedureTortsRemedies

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the probate court erred by granting Tradd traditional summary judgment on the estate's conversion claim.
  2. Whether the probate court abused its discretion by denying Childress's motion for continuance and thereby preventing her from obtaining or presenting evidence to oppose summary judgment.
  3. Whether Childress's remaining appellate complaints were cognizable despite inadequate briefing and lack of preservation.

Holdings

  1. Only two complaints were cognizable: whether summary judgment was proper and whether the trial court improperly denied a continuance. The remaining complaints were inadequately briefed and unpreserved because they were not presented to the trial court by a timely request, objection, or motion.
  2. Traditional summary judgment was proper because Tradd conclusively established every element of conversion and Childress failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact.
  3. The probate court did not abuse its discretion by denying Childress's motion for continuance of the summary-judgment hearing.

Key quotations

To prevail on a traditional summary-judgment motion, the movant must show that no genuine issue of material fact exists and that the trial court should grant judgment as a matter of law. (6)
Tradd established his conversion claim. (9)
Given the extensive history of this litigation, the probate court’s experience with the will contest, the unclear materiality of the information Childress sought or what Childress expected to prove with the information, we cannot conclude on this record that the probate court abused its discretion by denying the motion for continuance. (12)

Factual background

Robert Carson Caldwell died after executing a will appointing Alex S. Tradd II as independent executor and leaving his estate to three charities. Dione Childress, who had lived with Caldwell and claimed that Caldwell had promised her property and compensation for caregiving, contested the will and asserted a back-pay claim. After Caldwell's death, Childress continued to occupy Caldwell's property, removed estate funds and personal property, and used rental income for personal purposes despite demands for return and a temporary injunction. Tradd sued for conversion, and the probate court granted summary judgment after Childress failed to respond to discovery and filed untimely summary-judgment responses.

Procedural history

Tradd, as independent executor, sued Childress for conversion of estate property and damages, and Childress counterclaimed for back pay. The probate court granted Tradd's traditional motion for summary judgment, dismissed Childress's counterclaim based on res judicata, awarded damages and attorney's fees, and denied Childress's motion for continuance. After a later bench trial on injunctive relief, the probate court entered a final judgment confirming the summary-judgment relief and granting additional injunctive relief. The court of appeals treated the appeal from the interlocutory order as an appeal from the final judgment and affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…