Heirs of W. S. Newman v. Dallas
| Decision Date | 01 January 1863 |
| Citation | 26 Tex. 642 |
| Parties | HEIRS OF W. S. NEWMAN v. J. L. DALLAS, GUARDIAN. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
The sale of a conditional certificate by the grantee passed no title under the law to the purchaser, but was inoperative and void. The case of Turner v. Hart, 10 Tex. 438, cited and approved.
The admissions of the grantee that he had made such a sale could add nothing to the legal effect of the act of sale of such a certificate; nor would the expense incurred by the purchaser in locating such a certificate and obtaining a patent raise an equity in his favor against the grantee; it might give him a claim for compensation, but nothing more.
APPEAL from Washington. Tried below before the Hon. R. E. B. Baylor.
This suit was brought by James L. Dallas, guardian of Lucinda Dallas, minor child and sole heir of Walter R. Dallas, deceased, against the heirs of William S. Newman, deceased, to perfect the title to three hundred and twenty acres of land, located by virtue of a certificate which was alleged to have been sold to the ancestor of plaintiff by the ancestor of defendants.
On the 20th day of November, 1841, William S. Newman sold, for a good and valuable consideration, to Walter R. Dallas, his conditional headright certificate, and delivered the same to him. Walter R. Dallas located the certificate and paid the fees therefor. Lucinda Dallas obtained the patent and paid the expenses therefor. The patent was issued to the heirs of W. S. Newman. It was admitted that W. S. Newman had said that he sold the certificate to Walter R. Dallas. The deaths of the respective ancestors and the heirships of the respective parties were admitted. Jury waived. Cause submitted to the court. Judgment that the heirs of W. S. Newman be divested of the title, and that the title be vested in Lucinda Dallas. The heirs of Newman prosecuted an appeal.
Asa Lewis, for appellants.
Horton and Ewing, for appellee.
The plaintiff sought to recover the land in question by virtue of the sale by the ancestor of the defendants to the plaintiff's ancestor of the conditional certificate of the former, issued under the act of the 4th of January, 1839 (Hart. Dig. art. 1924), and the alleged confirmation of the sale by the vendor. But we are of opinion that the plaintiff failed to make out a case which will support the recovery.
The conditional certificate was not the subject of sale by the grantee. H...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Buchanan v. Park
...issue of the unconditional certificate, is not susceptible of sale. Turner v. Hart, 10 Tex. 438; Smith v. Johnson, 8 Tex. 423; Newman v. Dallas, 26 Tex. 642. A contract to convey land, where the law prohibits its alienation, is illegal and void, and cannot be enforced. Hunt's Heirs v. Robin......