Beaumont Imp. Co. v. Carr
| Decision Date | 08 June 1903 |
| Citation | 75 S.W. 327 |
| Parties | BEAUMONT IMP. CO. v. CARR et al. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Action by the Beaumont Improvement Company against Clarinda Carr and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.
Greer, Greer, Nall & Parker and F. J. & R. C. Duff, for plaintiff in error. F. G. Morris and Greer & Minor, for defendants in error.
This suit was brought by plaintiff in error, in the form of an action of trespass to try title, to recover of defendants in error 56 acres of land near the northern limits of the city of Beaumont. The petition alleged, among other things, that the defendants were asserting some sort of claim to the land by reason of an alleged defect in a certificate of acknowledgment to a deed from Clarinda Carr to Joseph Hebert, under whom plaintiff in error claims. There was a prayer for the correction of the certificate. Defendant in error F. G. Morris answered by plea of not guilty, asserted title in himself to half the land, and asked that his title be quieted. He also pleaded limitation of four years against the prayer to correct the certificate. His answer did not disclose the nature or source of his title. The defendants in error Votaw and Collins answered as purchasers pendente lite from the heirs of Clarinda Carr, pleaded "Not guilty," and limitation of four years, and prayed that their title to a half interest in the land be quieted, both as against plaintiff and their codefendants. A trial before the court without a jury resulted in a judgment for defendants in error.
The record does not contain a statement of facts; hence such assignments as involve issues of fact, or are dependent upon the status of the facts, cannot be considered.
There appears in the record an agreement of the parties litigant whereby certain facts are admitted, and proof of them waived. It was contemplated that this should be used upon the trial in connection with the other evidence adduced. It is not made to appear in any proper way that it was so used, unless the purported findings of fact of the trial court may be properly taken into consideration, as the agreement as to facts is also embodied in them. The record does not show that there was a request presented to the judge for conclusions of fact and law, but there are in the record fact findings prepared and filed by the judge who tried the case. Their date indicates that they were...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taliaferro v. Saer
...203 S. W. 1171; Maverick v. Burney (Tex. Civ. App.) 30 S. W. 566; King v. Baldwin (Tex. Civ. App.) 37 S. W. 971; Beaumont Imp. Co. v. Carr, 32 Tex. Civ. App. 615, 75 S. W. 327. In its practice and procedure the Fourteenth district court is governed by article 2092, R. S., but there is nothi......
-
Q. Flores & Son v. First State Bank of Mission
...(Tex. Civ. App.) 262 S. W. 125; Southwest National Bank of Dallas v. Cates (Tex. Civ. App.) 262 S. W. 569; Beaumont Improvement Co. v. Carr, 32 Tex. Civ. App. 615, 75 S. W. 327. Appellee makes the following counter "The failure of the trial court to file its findings of fact and conclusions......
-
Southwest Nat. Bank v. Cates
...court was without authority to file same after the expiration of 10 days after the adjournment of court. Beaumont Improvement Co. v. Carr, 32 Tex. Civ. App. 615, 75 S. W. 327; Wandry v. Williams, 103 Tex. 91, 124 S. W. 85; Emery v. Barfield (Tex. Civ. App.) 156 S. W. 311; Velasco Fish & Oys......
-
Averill v. Wierhauser
...311; Maverick v. Burney, 30 S. W. 566; King v. Baldwin, 37 S. W. 971), and cannot be considered for any purpose (Beaumont Imp. Co. v. Carr, 32 Tex. Civ. App. 615, 75 S. W. 327). In Hanks v. Holt, 148 S. W. 599, it is held that, where the court failed to file findings and conclusions in time......