Here’s a summary of the case In re Estate of Guadalupe Lopez, Sr., Deceased (No. 24 0315) from the Supreme Court of Texas, decided Nov. 7 2025. You can view the full opinion here.
Facts & procedural history
• The decedent, Guadalupe Lopez, Sr., died. A bill of review was filed by Elvira Gonzalez, claiming she was the decedent’s common law (informal) wife and seeking heirship.
• A jury was tasked with determining whether Gonzalez and the decedent were informally married. The estate’s administrator (or representative) objected to Gonzalez’s expert witness.
• Gonzalez offered testimony from a former family court judge, who opined (as an “expert”) that the couple had established an informal marriage. The jury found in Gonzalez’s favor.
Issue
The principal issue: Was it error for the trial court to admit the former family court judge’s testimony as an expert on whether the evidence established an informal marriage? In other words, did the expert witness comply with Texas Rule of Evidence 702 (governing expert testimony)?
Holding
The court held: Yes — the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the expert’s testimony. And that error was harmful, requiring a new trial. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ judgment and remanded to the trial court.
Reasoning
• The court emphasized that under Rule 702, an expert may testify only if the expert provides knowledge beyond what the average juror would possess.
• Here, the question of whether an informal marriage existed is one that “the average juror” can understand and decide without expert assistance.
• Because the expert testimony was not necessary (did not offer specialized knowledge beyond the ordinary juror’s understanding), admitting it was error.
• The error was harmful because:
1. The expert’s testimony was central to the contested issue (informal marriage).
2. The evidence on that issue was conflicting.
3. The expert’s role was emphasized (she was a former judge) thus carrying persuasive weight.
Significance
• This decision reinforces the gate keeping role of trial courts under Rule 702: even if a witness has credentials (e.g., former judge), you must still show the proffered testimony aids the jury by virtue of specialized knowledge beyond common understanding.
• It clarifies that some legal/factual issues (here, establishing an informal marriage) may not warrant expert testimony because they fall within the ordinary experience of jurors.
The Girards Law Firm specializes in severe injury and wrongful death cases, especially those that involve birth injuries, brain damage, heart damage, spinal cord injuries, severe burns, commercial plane crashes and commercial trucking crashes nationwide, and especially in Texas, Arkansas and Oklahoma. James E. Girards is a private pilot licensed to fly single- and multi-engine aircraft in both visual and instrument conditions. Contact us at www.girardslaw.com by using the chat feature for more information.