Gaither v. Gaither
| Decision Date | 27 October 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 15167,15167 |
| Citation | 234 S.W.2d 135 |
| Parties | GAITHER v. GAITHER. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Robert L. Dalby, of Texarkana, for appellant.
Patman and Shiffer, of Texarkana, for appellee.
Appellant Boyd Gaither sued his stepmother, appellee Annie Gaither, in the district court of Bowie County, Texas, in trespass to try title to a certain 67 acre tract of land located and situated in said County, and also for recovery of personal property, about which there is no controversy here.
It was agreed between the parties that C. O. Gaither, deceased husband of appellee and father of appellant, was the common source of title.
Appellant submits his claim of title to the land upon a general warranty deed executed by C. O. Gaither and appellee Annie Gaither, dated August 31, 1936, naming appellant as grantee.
Appellee entered a plea of not guilty and, among other defenses, plead mutual mistake and prayed for reformation of the deed by granting to her a life estate in the property according to intention of all parties to the transaction, that such reservation was to have been set out in the deed.
Trial was to a jury and in answer to special issues submitted to it, the court rendered judgment for appellee, reforming the deed by inserting therein a life estate to her. Hence this appeal by appellant, consisting of thirteen points of error.
In answer to issues propounded to it, the jury found the following:
(1) That appellant and appellee agreed prior to the date of the deed in question as to the terms of the deed to be made by Mrs. Annie Gaither and her husband, C. O. Gaither, to appellant to the land in question.
(2) That appellee and appellant agreed prior to the date of the deed in question that its terms should include a reservation that appellee was to have a life estate in the land conveyed.
(3) That such life estate reservation was omitted from the deed by mistake of the scrivener.
(4) That appellee believed when she acknowledged the deed that such deed contained a life estate reservation.
(5) That the deed did not set out the agreement as between appellee and appellant.
(6) That appellant at the time he accepted the deed in question did not believe that same conveyed to him a full and absolute title to the land in question.
The testimony shows that appellee and appellant's father were married and lived on this tract of land as their homestead for several years prior to the execution of the deed. Appellee testified she had conversations with her late husband and appellant relative to the reservation of a life estate by her and her husband in the property which they were deeding to appellant; that in said conversations appellant neither agreed nor disagreed to the reservation but it was her understanding by his silence he was accepting the terms of the life estate reservation; that she thought the reservation was in the deed or she would not have signed it. She also testified she did not learn that the deed did not contain said life estate reservation until this suit was filed; that she and her husband continued to live on the place after their execution of the deed,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carminati v. Fenoglio, 15498
...166 S.W. 97; Pure Oil Co. v. Ross, 131 Tex. 41, 111 S.W.2d 1076; McCampbell v. Durst, 15 Tex.Civ.App., 522, 40 S.W. 315; Gaither v. Gaither, Tex.Civ.App., 234 S.W.2d 135, writ refused n. r. Where the vendee is chargeable with knowledge of a mistake in his deed, limitation begins to run from......
-
Sutton v. Grogan Supply Co., Lumber Division, 8079
...by the four-year statute of limitation, Art. 5529, Tex.Rev.Civ.Stats. prior to the commencement of the action in this case. Gaither v. Gaither, 234 S.W.2d 135 (Tex.Civ.App. Texarkana 1950, N.R.E.); Redburn v. Shield, 338 S.W.2d 323 (Tex.Civ.App. San Antonio, 1960, Err. Dism'd). Appellants' ......
-
Hardin v. State, 6243
...that the evidence was insufficient to establish the appellant's claim of mutual mistake. With this finding we agree. Gaither v. Gaither, Tex.Civ.App., 234 S.W.2d 135, writ ref., n. r. e.; Sun Oil Co. v. Bennett, 125 Tex. 540, 84 S.W.2d 447; Williams v. Nettles, Tex.Civ.App., 56 S.W.2d 321, ......