Legal Opinion

Moore v. Glasscock

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided December 17, 1948No. 2699Published

1Opinion

On Motion For Rehearing.

2Per curiam

Appellees contend in their motion for rehearing that the trial court was authorized to instruct a verdict because appellants failed to tender the amount of the debt due Dr. Moore. We do not agree with this contention. It iis undisputed that the land involved was a part of the homestead of appellants and was such at the time of the execution of the deed to Dr. Moore. If the instrument was intended as a mortgage on appellants’ homestead, it was void. This being true, it was not incumbent upon the appellant's to tender the amount of the debt as a prerequisite to their…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Elam v. ParkhillTexas Supreme Court · 1884
  2. Bemrod v. HeinzelmanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
  3. Citizens' Nat. Bank of Valliant, Okl. v. StroudCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API