Lee v. King
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Kaufman. Tried below before J. C. Robertson, Esq., Special Judge. Action for trespass on land. This cause was submitted, to the Judge upon an agreed statement in substance as follows : The plaintiffs are the children and heirs of W. P. King, to whom the land in controversy was originally granted and through whom both parties claim.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Kaufman. Tried below before J. C. Robertson, Esq., Special Judge. Action for trespass on land. This cause was submitted, to the Judge upon an agreed statement in substance as follows : The plaintiffs are the children and heirs of W. P. King, to whom the land in controversy was originally granted and through whom both parties claim. That W. P. King having died, his succession was opened in 1841 and was regularly continued by the appointment of different administrators down to 25tn July, 1842, when Frances A. King was appointed administratrix de bonis non of his estate and qualified…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
The sale was not void on the ground that the order of sale was made by the Probate Court on the petition of the administrator, (the law of January 16th, 1843, being then in force.) This has been settled in Maverick v. Alexander, (18 Tex. R. 179,) and Allen v. Clark’s heirs, decided at the present Term of the Court.
Nor is it void on the ground that Wm. M. Beal, the purchaser, was a citizen of Louisiana at the time of the sale, namely on the 3rd day of February, 1846.
It has been set up that Beal was an alien at the time of the sale, and arguments of much research and ability…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Hanrick v. HanrickTexas Supreme Court · 1880
- State v. SaisTexas Supreme Court · 1877