Davies v. Rutland

There is no merit in the contention that our decision (219 S. W. 235) is in conflict with the opinion in the ease of Fields v. Rye; 24 Tex. Civ. App. 272, 59 S. W. 306. In that case the defendant pleaded a parol sale of the land to him. The evidence plaintiff sought to introduce under the general denial interposed in his behalf by statute was not that no parol sale had ever been made, but that, if made, it was not binding because the premises constituted a homestead. The distinction is obvious. It is apparent, we think, from our previous opinions that we hold that defendant failed to…