Legal Opinion

Hill v. Preston

Texas Supreme Court

Decided January 21, 1931No. 4942Published

1Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

It may be said that on the default of Hill, LaRoe and Parker and Scott Woodward to pay the interest on their debt to Lloyd, that if they were without equities, Lloyd had the right, without notice to them, and if with equities, after notice to sell the land to another party and convey the superior title: Kennedy v. Embry, 72 Texas, 387, 10 S. W., 88; Lipscomb v. Fuqua, 103 Texas, 585, 131 S. W. 1061; Thompson v. Westbrook, 56 Texas, 225; Morrison v. Barry, 30 S. W., 376 (writ refused).

On the other hand where a vendor elects to sue for the debt and the establishment of…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Hill v. HoeldtkeTexas Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Spann v. Cochran & EwingTexas Supreme Court · 1885
  3. Lipscomb v. FuquaTexas Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Shriner v. CraftSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
  5. Pierce v. MoremanTexas Supreme Court · 1892

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

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

Powered by the Exa API