Legal Opinion

Maulding v. Coffin

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided February 7, 1894No. 210PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JAMES, Chief Justice.

Conclusions of Fact. — 1. In September, 1889, S. M. Rugg and wife conveyed to Mrs. Maulding certain real property in El Paso. The deed recited the consideration to be $11,000, paid $7000 in cash, and that she “shall assume and pay off a balance of $2000 due on a certain promissory note made by C. Q. Stanton to W. Coffin for $3000, which note is fully described in a deed of trust made by said C. Q. Stanton to C. O. Coffin, trustee, dated April 16, 1887, and recorded in book 4, page 124, record of deeds of trust in El Paso County, Texas,” and also a balance of $2000 due on…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fievel v. ZuberTexas Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Pierce v. MoremanTexas Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Groesbeeck v. CrowTexas Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Marsh v. HubbardTexas Supreme Court · 1878

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Slaughter v. MorrisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1926
  2. Tolleson v. NoblesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API