Russell & Seisfeld v. Kirkbride
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Hopkins. Tried below before the Hon. E. W. Terhune, Special Judge.
1Opinion of the Court
Stayton, Associate Justice.
That Garrette sold to Kirkbride,by executory contract, the land for which the note sued on was given, is an admitted fact, as is it that Garrette transferred to the appellants this note, given to secure a part of the purchase money, before his note became due.
This being true, there is no doubt that, as between Kirkbride, Garrette and the appellants, a lien on the land for which the note was given passed to the appellants; but as between them, no further right to or interest in the land passed to any one by the transfer of the note.
The vendee, under such conveyances,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- McKamey v. ThorpTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Dunlap's Adm'r v. WrightTexas Supreme Court · 1854
- Wethered v. BoonTexas Supreme Court · 1856
- Glasscock v. HughesTexas Supreme Court · 1881
- Baker v. ComptonTexas Supreme Court · 1879
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Humphreys-Mexia Co. v. GammonTexas Supreme Court · 1923
- Sanderson v. SandersonTexas Supreme Court · 1937
- Adams v. WilliamsTexas Supreme Court · 1923
- Pierce v. MoremanTexas Supreme Court · 1892
- Hamblen v. FoltsTexas Supreme Court · 1888
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.