Harle v. Texas Southern Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 08 April 1905 |
| Parties | HARLE et al. v. TEXAS SOUTHERN RY. CO.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL> |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Harrison County; R. B. Levy, Judge.
Action by the Texas Southern Railway Company against Julia C. Harle and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Reversed.
T. P. Young and Chas. E. Carter, for appellants. Scott, Jones & Gardner, for appellee.
The appellee sued Mrs. Julia C. Harle and husband, J. W. Harle, and George W. Parrott, alleging that it is the owner of a line of railroad from Marshall, in Harrison county, Tex., to Winnsboro, Tex., and owns and is in possession of the right of way, together with all the improvements, buildings, superstructures, ties, bridges, rails, viaducts, etc., and is the owner of certain franchises, rights, and privileges, by authority of its charter of incorporation, extending through Lamar to and including Jefferson and certain intervening counties; that it owns and is in possession of and is using certain terminal properties and facilities in the towns of Winnsboro, Gilmer, Harleton, and Marshall, including carhouses, engine houses, shops, warehouses, station houses, water stations, depots, and depot grounds; that defendants are claiming some right, title, or interest in that part of the said property being located in the city of Marshall, Harrison county, including the side and spur tracks and grounds at the present depot of the plaintiff in Marshall, and also the line of railroad from Marshall to Montvale Springs, in said Harrison county, Tex.; that said claim is a cloud upon plaintiff's title, and plaintiff prays for judgment removing said cloud. Defendants answered that they disclaimed all title to all of the property sued for by appellee, save and except that part of the railroad and right of way, equipment, and appurtenances situated in Harrison county, Tex., and being the line of road, etc., from Marshall to Montvale Springs, in said county, and described as follows: "The railroad extending northwest from Marshall to Montvale Springs, in Harrison county, Texas, said road lying in Harrison county, and now being operated under the name of the Texas Southern Railway Company, including the right of way, roadbed, side tracks, depot grounds, depot buildings, warehouses, franchises, iron superstructures, all bridges, culverts and appurtenances, all of which property is situated in the said county of Harrison." Defendants claimed title to said above-described property as being the separate property of Mrs. Harle, and pleaded a general denial and not guilty; that same was bought for her at receiver's sale, and paid for with her separate funds; and she prayed for affirmative relief. The defendants further averred that the property claimed by them had been placed in the hands of a receiver, it then being owned and operated by the Paris, Marshall & Sabine Pass Railway Company; that it had been sold by order of court, etc., and Mrs. Harle was the purchaser; and that title vested in her by reason of said sale. Plaintiff then filed demurrers attacking defendants' plea of absolute ownership to the property claimed, which demurrers were sustained. After hearing the evidence, the court instructed the jury to return a verdict for plaintiff.
Appellants assign as error the action of the court in sustaining the special demurrer to that portion of the answer claiming title to a certain portion of the railroad under a decree of the court in the receivership proceedings. This assignment is well taken, but the court's action became immaterial, as upon the trial evidence was admitted on all the matters pertaining to defendants' rights.
The court erred in instructing a verdict for plaintiff, and this is complained of. The record shows the following: "It was proven and admitted by both the plaintiff and defendants in open court that all of the property, corporate rights, franchises, and privileges of the Paris, Marshall & Sabine Pass Railway Company were duly placed in the hands of J. W. Harle, as receiver, by an order of the district court of Harrison county, Texas, in the suit of the First National Bank v. Paris, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Erickson v. Wiper
...Plummer, 149 Ky. 534, 149 S. W. 905;Johns v. Clother, 78 Wash. 602, 139 Pac. 755;Harle v. Texas Southern Ry. Co., 39 Tex. Civ. App. 43, 86 S. W. 1048;Grooms v. Morrison, 249 Mo. 544, 155 S. W. 430;Conrow v. Huffine, 48 Mont. 437, 138 Pac. 1094;Fritz v. Mills, 12 Cal. App. 113, 106 Pac. 725;......
-
Erickson v. Wiper
... ... 534, 149 S.W. 905; ... Johns v. Clother, 78 Wash. 602, 139 P. 755; ... Harle v. Texas Southern R. Co. 39 Tex. Civ. App. 43, ... 86 S.W. 1048; Grooms v. Morrison, 249 Mo ... ...
-
Clarkson v. Ruiz
...to estop her from claiming the Clarkson interest in Survey 553. Thompson v. Crim, 132 Tex. 586, 126 S.W.2d 18; Harle v. Texas Southern Ry. Co., 39 Tex.Civ.App. 43, 86 S.W. 1048; Ayres v. Fellrath, 5 Tex.Civ.App. 557, 24 S.W. 347; First State Bank of Tomball v. Tinkham, Tex.Civ.App., 195 S. ......
-
Riley v. Palmer
...163; Drummond v. National Bank, 152 S. W. 739; Ralls v. Parish, 151 S. W. 1092; Staples v. Word, 48 S. W. 751; Harle v. Texas Southern Ry. Co., 39 Tex. Civ. App. 43, 86 S. W. 1048; O'Brion v. Camp, 46 Tex. Civ. App. 12, 101 S. W. 557. But it is expressly stated in the bill of exceptions tha......