Greer v. Greer

• Decision Date: 05 June 1945
• Docket Number: No. 6163.,6163.
• Parties: GREER v. GREER.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

Page 104

189 S.W.2d 104

GREER v. GREER.

No. 6163.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Texarkana.

June 5, 1945.

Rehearing Denied June 21, 1945.

Appeal from District Court, Wood County; Nat W. Brooks, Judge.

Trespass to try title action by L. C. Greer against Rosetta Greer. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Sam J. Dotson and Cecil Storey, both of Longview, for appellant.

Jones & Jones, of Mineola, and R. M. Mountcastle, of Muskogee, Okl., for appellee.

WILLIAMS, Justice.

On August 10, 1936, during the marriage of L. C. Greer and Rosetta Greer, the Federal Land Bank of Houston executed a deed which purports to convey to L. C. Greer, as grantee, a 70-acre tract of land, more or less, out of the A. N. McKnight survey in Wood County, Texas. The deed recites a consideration of $300 cash then paid it by L. C. Greer and his execution of a promissory vendor's lien note for the principal sum of $575 payable on the amortization plan in ten annual installments of $74.47, on November 1st of each year, beginning November 1, 1937, with a preliminary interest of $6.47 due November 1, 1936. Rosetta Greer paid the $300 out of funds she had inherited from her father. L. C. Greer executed the $575 note. There is evidence that the agent for the Federal Land Bank refused to take the note if executed by a married woman, and at his suggestion, the note was executed by L. C. Greer and the deed made accordingly. L. C. Greer denied this and contended that the land was bought by both and the payments were made due in November so they could meet same out of their crops. The evidence is in dispute as to how the first four annual payments were met, whether by Rosetta from proceeds of oil runs from her separate estate or if by L. C. Greer out of small crops he may have grown during the time, or if in part by the crops and her oil runs. In 1941 an oil and gas lease covering the 70-acre tract was sold for a bonus of $26,500, and about this time the balance due on the $575 note was paid off out of the $26,500 which had been deposited in a joint account of the two with a local bank. We agree with appellant that issues of fact were raised by the above evidence introduced in the instant trial, which, if the same had been submitted to the jury and answered in favor of plaintiff, would have impressed at least a part of the 70 acres as community property under our Texas statutes.

Later in 1941, the couple moved to Muskogee County, Oklahoma, where a 240-acre farm, a residence in Muskogee, personal property consisting of livestock, farming equipment, automobiles, household equipment and other realty were acquired. This couple and their children had resided in Muskogee, Oklahoma, for more than a year when in 1942 Rosetta Greer sued L. C. Greer for divorce, for custody of the four children and for property settlement.

As a result of the trial of such suit in which both parties appeared in person and by their respective attorneys and in which extensive amended pleadings were filed by the litigants, the District Court of Muskogee County, Oklahoma, on November 25, 1942, entered judgment under the terms of which Rosetta was granted a divorce and custody of the children, and their property rights were adjudicated. It is recited in that judgment:

"That on or about the 10th day of August, 1936, there was purchased with money which belonged to this plaintiff, 70 acres of land in Wood County, Texas, described as follows, to-wit: `70 acres of land, more or less, out of the A. N. McKnight Survey, Patent No. 736, Volume 3, Abstract No 400.' and that although the deed was taken in the name of L. C. Greer, that was done as a matter of convenience and that the entire purchase price of the land, together with the amount paid down on the purchase price, together with the subsequent payments of same, was purchased with the individual money of the plaintiff herein, Rosetta Greer, which money she had received from her guardian or from her ancestor's estate."

The judgment was subsequently amended to read:

"The Court further finds that all of this property, whether in the name of L. C. Greer or Rosetta Greer, of whatsoever kind or description, whether real, personal or mixed, and wheresoever located or situated, belongs to and is the property of plaintiff herein, having been purchased with her separate and individual property and had not been acquired by their joint industry during coverture, to all of which findings and conclusions defendant excepts and exceptions are allowed."

And decreed with...