Alford v. Alford

• Decision Date: 04 October 1892
• Citation: 21 S.W. 283
• Parties: ALFORD et ux. v. ALFORD.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

21 S.W. 283

ALFORD et ux. v. ALFORD.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

October 4, 1892.

Appeal from district court, Harrison county; A. J. Booty, Judge.

Trespass to try title by L. P. Alford against E. L. Alford and wife. From a judgment in plaintiff's favor, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

F. H. Prendergast, S. T. Scott, and T. P. Young, for appellants. Wilson & Lane, for appellee.

WILLIAMS, J.

This was an action of trespass to try title brought by appellee, December 28, 1889, in the ordinary form, for the recovery of 109 acres of land in the possession of appellants, who were made defendants, and for damages. The appellants pleaded not guilty, and upon the trial there was a verdict and judgment for appellee for the land and $162.50 damages, from which this appeal is prosecuted. Appellee introduced in evidence the following deed from himself to appellants: "The state of Texas, Harrison county. Know all men by these presents, that I, L. P. Alford, joined herein by his children, J. P. Alford, W. L. Alford, and H. C. Alford, for and in consideration of an agreement by E. L. Alford and wife, Mollie Alford, during their life, and at their death to their heirs, this day executed and delivered to me, to care for and support me during my natural life, and furnish me with the necessaries and comforts suitable to my age and physical condition, and with clothes to wear, the receipt of which said agreement is hereby acknowledged, have this day bargained and sold, and by these presents do hereby bargain, sell, release, and convey, unto the said E. L. Alford and wife, Mollie Alford, during their natural life, and at their death to their heirs, the following described property: * * * To have and to hold the same, together with, all and singular, the rights, members, hereditaments, and appurtenances thereto belonging, unto them, the said E. L. Alford and Mollie Alford, their heirs and assigns, forever, upon condition that they shall faithfully comply with all and each of the stipulations in their said agreement to me, and before mentioned as the consideration of this instrument; that, if said agreement is not complied with, then this conveyance shall be void, and of no force and effect. And a vendor's lien is hereby expressly reserved on said land by L. P. Alford to secure the faithful performance of said agreement executed by E. L. Alford and wife, during their natural life, and at their death to their heirs, as the consideration thereof; and the right to live on and use said land during the term of his natural life is hereby expressly reserved; and at the death of him, the said L. P. Alford, if all of the provisions of said agreement have been complied with, said premises by this conveyance shall become the absolute property, in fee simple. This Nov. 2d, 1888." Appellee then proved that, at the time of the execution of this instrument, there was a verbal undertaking on the part of appellants to do the things for which the deed stipulated, as its consideration, and introduced evidence for the purpose of showing that they had failed to perform their part of the contract. It was shown that appellants moved into the house on the premises mentioned in the deed, and lived there with appellee for about six months, when appellee left, appellants remaining in possession. Appellee testified that he occupied his old room in the house, using his own furniture; that he ate at the same table with appellants; that the food and cooking were bad; that the coffee was not good, and had grounds in it; that no clothes were given him, and that he had to pay for his own washing; that his bed was not properly cared for, and many vermin were allowed to get on it, so many that he could not use it for a month after he left; that on three or four occasions, the details of which he fully gave, appellant, E. L. Alford, who was his son, cursed and abused him. Appellee was 78 years of age, and his wife had died only a few days before the agreement was made between him and appellants. He complained to his daughter-in-law of the way in which his son was treating him, and she replied she could not help it. The testimony of appellants denied these facts testified to by appellee, and there was other evidence offered on each side making a conflict on...