v. Glenbrook Patiohome Owners Ass’n, 933 S.W.2d 570, 577 (Tex.App.1996). According to the Texas Supreme Court, “[i]t is ... a well-recognized principle of law that one’s homestead right in property can never rise any higher than the right, title, or interest that he owns in the property attempted to be impressed with a homestead right.” Olivarez, 29 F.3d at 205 (quoting Sayers v. Pyland, 139 Tex. 57, 161 S.W.2d 769, 773 (1942)). Perry’s interest in the property, immediately following the 1985 transfer, became one of a tenant-at-will. See Olivarez, 29 F.3d at 205 (noting that couple who occupied property without title, but with permission of the title holder, became tenants at will)(citing DeGrassi v. DeGrassi, 533 S.W.2d 81, 87 (Tex.Civ.App.1976)). Accord Shepler, 563 S.W.2d at 385-86 (<HOLDING>). Perry may thus claim a limited homestead
holding that the junior mortgagee had no right title or interest in the real estate after the sale was confirmed in the purchaser who became title owner holding that property transferred by a spouse to avoid support obligation may be considered on the issue of property distribution as well as alimony holding that the legal title holders to real property held it in constructive trust for the equitable title holder who was entitled to the real property based on an earlier contract holding that where a bankrupt wife transferred a certain lot to her husband the husband being already the equitable owner of the transferred property it cannot be said that the lot was transferred to him without consideration holding that claimants who transferred title to a corporation but continued to reside on the property became tenants at will