McWilliams v. Cornelius Bros. & Co.
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Mitchell. Tried below before the Hon. Wm. Kennedy. On July 16, 1884, the appellant executed an affidavit and claimant’s-bond under the statute to try the right of property to an undivided one-third interest in and to a certain herd or stock of cattle, numbering about twenty-five hundred head, running at large on the range known as the Cornelius Bros. & Co.’s range, in Scurry and adjacent counties, and known as the Cornelius Bros. & Co.’s stock of cattle.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Mitchell. Tried below before the Hon. Wm. Kennedy. On July 16, 1884, the appellant executed an affidavit and claimant’s-bond under the statute to try the right of property to an undivided one-third interest in and to a certain herd or stock of cattle, numbering about twenty-five hundred head, running at large on the range known as the Cornelius Bros. & Co.’s range, in Scurry and adjacent counties, and known as the Cornelius Bros. & Co.’s stock of cattle. Also to twenty-five head of horses and fifteen head of cattle running at large on the same range, the property having been…
1Opinion of the Court
Robertson, Associate Justice.
The object in construing an instrument is to arrive at the intent of the maker. If this is plainly expressed in intelligible words, there is no room for construction. The instrument under which appellant claimed the property in controversy purported to be a deed of assignment for the benefit of creditors under the statute. The statute authorized an assignment for the benefit of all creditors; or one for the benefit of those creditors who will accept what they receive under the assignment in full of their demands. The deed made by McKenzie was expressed to be for…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Southwestern Drug Corp. v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932