Buchanan v. Burnett

• Decision Date: 02 June 1909
• Citation: 119 S.W. 1141
• Parties: BUCHANAN v. BURNETT et ux.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

119 S.W. 1141

BUCHANAN v. BURNETT et ux.

Supreme Court of Texas.

June 2, 1909.

Error from Court of Civil Appeals of Second Supreme Judicial District.

Suit by W. D. Burnett and wife against W. B. Buchanan. A judgment for plaintiffs was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals (114 S. W. 406), and defendant brings error. Affirmed.

Geo. E. Smith, for plaintiff in error. Goodson & Goodson, for defendants in error.

BROWN, J.

Burnett and wife instituted this suit in the district court of Comanche county against Buchanan to set aside a sale of land made to them by the latter, situated in the said county, upon the ground that Buchanan, in making the sale, fraudulently and falsely represented to the plaintiff that he had a good title and could make a good title to the land to them, which representations the plaintiffs relied upon. It is charged that the said representations were false, that Buchanan had no title to the land, and that, relying upon the representations, Burnett and wife received a deed from Buchanan for the land and paid him in cash $1,600 about August 11, 1905. The petition also sought to fix a lien upon another tract of land which it was alleged had been purchased and paid for by Buchanan with the money received by him from Burnett and wife. There are no questions made upon the pleadings, and it is unnecessary to state them more specifically. The essential facts in this case can be stated briefly as follows: Buchanan claimed to own 160 acres of land situated in Comanche county, a part of the Humphrey survey, and proposed to sell it to Burnett and wife. Burnett was ignorant of land titles and asked Buchanan if he had a good title and could make him a good title, to which Buchanan replied, in substance, that he had a good title and could make him a good title to the land. Buchanan furnished to Burnett an abstract of title which showed the defect in his title. Burnett and a friend looked over the abstract, but Burnett testified that he knew nothing about such matters, that he was hardly able to read the abstract, and, in fact, could not read all of it, and that he relied upon the representations of Buchanan that he had a good title to the land in making the purchase. The deed was made and the purchase money paid in cash. Burnett went into possession about August, 1905, and on the 6th day of March, 1906, the true owner instituted suit in the district court against Burnett and wife to recover the land. Burnett tendered the possession of the land to Buchanan and offered to reconvey it to him, which Buchanan refused. He alleged that he was too poor to remove to another place during that year, as it was too late to plant a crop, and he could not live without making a crop, for which reason he had remained in the possession of the land with the consent of the true owner. There is no contention on the part of Buchanan that he had a good title to the land. It seems that the title was unquestionably bad. The district court gave judgment in favor of Burnett and wife for $1,600 and fixing a lien on 160 acres of land purchased with the money received therefor. No...