Tendick v. Evetts
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Colorado. Tried below before the Hon. L. Lindsay. This case (Ho. 750) was an action of trespass to try title, brought in the District Court of Colorado county at the Fall Term, 1869, by Milton Evetts, Susan H. More-head, and her husband, William H. Morehead; Susan H., Polly A., Samuel S., Flint, and William H. Stuteville, minor heirs of Mary A. Stuteville, by their guardian, James C. Stuteville; Martha E. Webb, and Eliza Johnson, and her husband, Daniel Johnson;…
Read the full summary
Error from Colorado. Tried below before the Hon. L. Lindsay. This case (Ho. 750) was an action of trespass to try title, brought in the District Court of Colorado county at the Fall Term, 1869, by Milton Evetts, Susan H. More-head, and her husband, William H. Morehead; Susan H., Polly A., Samuel S., Flint, and William H. Stuteville, minor heirs of Mary A. Stuteville, by their guardian, James C. Stuteville; Martha E. Webb, and Eliza Johnson, and her husband, Daniel Johnson; against Charles Schmidt and Robert P. Tendick, for a part of lot ¡No. 4 in block ¡No. 12, in the town of Columbus. The…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
The leading principle involved in these cases was before the court for decision at a former term, in Ho. 356.
The opinion of the court, possibly from its own want of clearness, seems to have been misunderstood in construing the will of Elizabeth J. Bond. The court meant unequivocally to say that a life-estate was given to Mary A. Stuteville, with a vested remainder to her heirs.
*279Ho. 750 was adjudicated in the District Court before our opinion in Ho. 356 was published. The district judge interpreted the will in Ho. 750 to create a life-estate in Mrs. Stuteville, with remainder to the heirs of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hancock v. ButlerTexas Supreme Court · 1858
- Hawkins v. LeeTexas Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by2 opinions
- Weller v. WellerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1899
- Barmore v. DarraghCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921