Legal Opinion

Snowden v. Rush

Texas Supreme Court

Decided January 17, 1888No. 2272PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal from DeWitt. Tried below before the Hon. H. Clay Pleasants.

1Opinion of the Court

Collard, Judge.

AppvT'.nt assigns errors as f.Howst

*594“1. The court erred in holding that the plaintiff s were barred by the five years statute of limitations, when the facts show that the defendant purchased the land with full knowledge that their vendor had no title, and took a deed and went into possession of the same with notice both actual and constructive of the title of plaintiff.
“2. The court erred in its conclusion that proof of payment of taxes for four years is sufficient to make the five years statute of limitation available as a defense, when the other requisites of the statute have…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Ledyard v. BrownTexas Supreme Court · 1864
  2. Long v. GarnettTexas Supreme Court · 1883
  3. Paxton v. MeyerTexas Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Watson v. HopkinsTexas Supreme Court · 1864
  5. Harris v. HardemanTexas Supreme Court · 1863

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Neal v. PickettTexas Commission of Appeals · 1926
  2. Watts v. BruceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903
  3. Bailey & Walker v. LawsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1893
  4. Alford v. ColeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933
  5. Wiggins v. Houston Oil Co. of TexasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1947

8 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