Wright v. Thompson
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Houston. Harper was merely offered to prove that the defendant occupied the land as his tenant. He was objected to as incompetent, but the ground of incompetency was not stated in the bill of exceptions. The bond recited that Stephens was then in possession of the land.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Houston. Harper was merely offered to prove that the defendant occupied the land as his tenant. He was objected to as incompetent, but the ground of incompetency was not stated in the bill of exceptions. The bond recited that Stephens was then in possession of the land. It was in the penal sum of $2,000, conditioned to convey the tract of land in controversy, containing ninety acres, by good and sufficient title, as soon as the obligor should receive a patentf or in case he should not be able to make title, to pay back the money with interest and to pay for all improvements. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
This action, to try title, was commenced in February, 1855. In 1842 the plaintiff had sold the land to one Stephens, executing a bond for title and acknowledging, in effect, that he had received, the purchase money. Stephens went into possession in 1843, and died in 1844 or 1845. His widow married Garrett, who administered on the estate of Stephens, and who in January, 1848, assigned the bond (by indorsement) to McMillan, signing his name as administrator of Stephens'. McMillan afterwards assigned, by indorsement, to Harper. And the defendant, Thompson, was recognized by…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Burleson v. BurlesonTexas Supreme Court · 1866
- Shields v. HuntTexas Supreme Court · 1876
- Green v. PriddyTexas Supreme Court · 1923
- Gullett v. O'ConnorTexas Supreme Court · 1881
- Lester v. HutsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.