Legal Opinion

Sprinkles v. Kerbow

Texas Commission of Appeals

Decided February 3, 1926No. 714-4279PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNickels, J.

The suit, as tried, involved the question of whether or not Mrs. Mary Kerbow (since deceased), at the time of the execution by her of the deed in question, was possessed of sufficient mental capacity to enable her to make the deed and its grant.

Upon appeal the honorable Court of Civil Appeals (264 S. W. 115) expressed this conclusion, “We think the finding of the jury was clearly against the great weight of the evidence,” the jury having found lack of sufficient capacity. This involved a finding of fact, in the exercise of the constitutional jurisdiction of that court, and it is binding upon…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Choate v. San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Wilson v. Freeman, ReceiverTexas Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Brown v. City Service Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1922
  4. Kerbow v. SprinklesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Greenlaw v. DilworthTexas Commission of Appeals · 1927
  2. Grimes v. MulryCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1955
  3. Retailers' Fire Ins. Co. v. Jackson Gin Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1928
  4. Williams v. BeloTexas Commission of Appeals · 1931
  5. Hackel v. FordCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932

3 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