Legal Opinion

Naugher v. Patterson

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided December 5, 1894No. 1035PublishedCited by 9 opinions

The nature of the petition appears in the opinion. The defendant pleaded general demurrer and special demurrer: 1. The action is not sufficient as a suit of trespass to try title, because (1) it is not indorsed as required by statute; (2) it does not allege unlawful ouster by defendant; (3) it does not fix a day on which plaintiffs were ousted. 2. It is not a bill to clear cloud, because (1) they do not allege possession; (2) they do not set up the cloud it is desired to…

Read the full summary

The nature of the petition appears in the opinion. The defendant pleaded general demurrer and special demurrer: 1. The action is not sufficient as a suit of trespass to try title, because (1) it is not indorsed as required by statute; (2) it does not allege unlawful ouster by defendant; (3) it does not fix a day on which plaintiffs were ousted. 2. It is not a bill to clear cloud, because (1) they do not allege possession; (2) they do not set up the cloud it is desired to clear off. Defendant also pleaded not guilty, and general denial. Judgment for plaintiffs. Other facts are given in the…

1Opinion of the Court

FISHER, Chief Justice.

— We give the statement of the case as shown by the brief of appellees.

This suit was filed by appellees on March 19, 1892, as the heirs at law, next of kin, of W. T. Patterson, who died in Austin, Texas, June 23, 1891, intestate and umharried, at the age of 76 years. He had resided in said city for more than forty year’s, living by himself, with a negro woman for his househeeper, until 1886, when the appellant went to live with him as his confidential agent and attendant. The suit, while it contains all of the material allegations of trespass to try title, is in the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. International & Great Northern Railway Co. v. RagsdaleTexas Supreme Court · 1886
  2. May v. SladeTexas Supreme Court · 1859
  3. H. H. Rowland & Bro. v. MurphyTexas Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Ferguson v. FergusonTexas Supreme Court · 1864

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Hicks v. Southwestern Settlement & Development Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1945
  2. Texas & New Orleans Railroad v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1904
  3. Fernandez v. CanoCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
  4. Maris v. AdamsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
  5. Unsell v. Federal Land Bank of HoustonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1940

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API