Legal Opinion

Black v. Caviness and Patterson

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 10, 1893No. 67PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error from Lamar. Tried below before Hon. E. D, McClelland.

1Opinion of the Court

STEPHENS, Associate Justice.

In the summer of 1886, plaintiff in error, R. A. Black, and one J. D. Cock, entered into a verbal agreement to purchase together a certain tract of land situated in Lamar County. In pursuance of this agreement the deed was taken in the name of Cock, but the purchase was understood to be for their mutual benefit. The purchase price of the land was $300, of which $50 was borrowed on their joint note, and paid as the money of Black. After the execution of the deed to Cock, he borrowed, with the consent of Black, from E. G. Caviness, in the month of September, 1886,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Swift v. TysonSupreme Court of the United States · 1842
  2. McKamey v. ThorpTexas Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Padgett v. LawrenceNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
  4. Clark v. HaneyTexas Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Hudson v. WilkinsonTexas Supreme Court · 1876

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Johnson v. DarrTexas Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Alexander v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1923
  3. Clark & Boice Lumber Co. v. Commercial Nat. Bank of JeffersonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1917
  4. Nueces County v. Nueces County Drainage Dist. No. 2Court of Appeals of Texas · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API