Ehlinger v. Clark
Citation | 8 S.W.2d 666 |
Decision Date | 25 June 1928 |
Docket Number | (No. 4670.) |
Parties | EHLINGER, County Judge, et al. v. CLARK.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL> |
Court | Supreme Court of Texas |
Suit by John P. Ehlinger, County Judge, in behalf of Fayette County, and others, against I. E. Clark. Judgment for defendant was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals (284 S. W. 974), and plaintiffs bring error. Judgments of district court and Court of Civil Appeals reversed and rendered, in so far as they denied recovery under plaintiffs' amended petition.
John P. Ehlinger, of La Grange, for plaintiffs in error.
H. R. Clark, of La Grange, and H. W. Wallace, of Cuero, for defendant in error.
Chas. L. Black, E. F. Smith, Smith & Gibson, and J. T. Robison, all of Austin, Nelson Phillips, of Dallas, and S. C. Padelford, of Fort Worth, amici curiæ.
This suit was instituted by Fayette county, through its county judge, against I. E. Clark, to recover the amount due upon two notes, each for the sum of $2,000, executed by the defendant in error in favor of John P. Ehlinger, county judge of Fayette county. The defense was that the commissioners' court of Fayette county was forbidden by law to enter into the contract and agreement out of which the notes arose, and that the notes were therefore illegal and void. Upon trial before the court without a jury, the defense was sustained, and recovery on the notes denied. The county appealed the case to the Court of Civil Appeals, and the judgment was affirmed. 284 S. W. 974.
The notes were part of the consideration for the execution of an oil lease on the school lands of Fayette county. The contract was in the form of two written instruments, each containing many stipulations, some of which are not material. We shall, however, as a matter of convenience and accuracy, copy the material portions of the contract. The contract was entered into on the 4th day of April, 1920, between the commissioners' court of Fayette county and I. E. Clark. By the terms of the contract an oil lease was made on the school land belonging to Fayette county, located in Baylor county. The land is definitely described in the contract, and contains some 4,000 acres. Those portions of the contract which we deem material read as follows:
On the same day the foregoing agreement was entered into, a supplemental agreement, made a part of the preceding, was also executed. The material portion of this supplemental agreement read as follows:
The county school land here involved was acquired by Fayette county and held by it by virtue of section 6 of article 7 of the Constitution, which, in part, reads:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Henley v. United States
...fee in the mineral estate separate from the surface, which was an interest in the land. In the meantime, the case of Ehlinger v. Clark, 117 Tex. 547, 8 S.W.2d 666 (1928) caused some confusion by indicating that the entire mineral estate was separated from the surface and passed to the lesse......
-
Houston Lighting & Power Co. v. Fleming
...v. Cobb, 85 Tex. 448, 450, 21 S.W. 1034; Fleming v. Texas Loan Agency, 87 Tex. 238, 241, 27 S.W. 126, 26 L.R.A. 250; Ehlinger v. Clark, 117 Tex. 547, 554, 8 S.W.2d 666. Under the major conclusion that appellant's right to the use of the streets came to it from the State under R.S. Article 1......
-
Short v. W. T. Carter & Brother
...Vernon's Ann.St. Greene v. Robison, 117 Tex. 516, 535, 8 S.W.2d 655; Theisen v. Robison, 117 Tex. 489, 8 S.W.2d 646; Ehlinger v. Clark, 117 Tex. 547, 8 S.W.2d 666. This section of the Constitution has been construed as requiring the sale of school land and prohibiting the withholding of it ......
-
People ex rel. Scott v. Grivetti
...304, 157 A.2d 463; State v. Thompson, 193 Tenn. 395, 246 S.W.2d 59; Arbogast v. Shields, 123 W.Va. 167, 14 S.E.2d 4, 7; Ehlinger v. Clark, 117 Tex. 547, 8 S.W.2d 666. In view of our previously exercised responsibility (People ex rel. Scott v. Kerner, 32 Ill.2d 539, 208 N.E.2d 561; People ex......