Houston v. Jordan

• Decision Date: 27 November 1891
• Citation: 18 S.W. 702
• Parties: HOUSTON <I>et al.</I> v. JORDAN <I>et al.</I>
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

18 S.W. 702

HOUSTON et al. v. JORDAN et al.

Supreme Court of Texas.

November 27, 1891.

Appeal from district court, Hopkins county; E. W. TERHUNE, Judge.

Action by C. M. Houston and Nancy Houston against Walter Jordan and others. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

B W. Foster, for appellants.

STAYTON, C. J.

This action was brought by C. M. and Nancy Houston to recover a lot 44 feet in length and 30 feet in width; but, during the pendency of the action, Nancy Houston died, and it must be deemed to have been prosecuted to final judgment by C. M. Houston as the administrator of her estate. There is no statement of facts, and the case must be disposed of under the conclusions of fact and law found by the court.

The lot was the separate property of Nancy Houston; and defendants claim through a deed executed by her and her husband, with privy examination, made on April 1, 1882, before an officer authorized to take such acknowledgments. It appears from the conclusions of fact that, as early as the year 1878, defendants desired to acquire the land in controversy for the purpose of using it as a private burial ground, — they having a pressing need for it, — and that a parol agreement was made that they should have it at a designated price, after which they inclosed and used it for the contemplated purpose; but the conveyance relied upon was not executed until long after the parol agreement was made. The conveyance in controversy bears date March 27, 1882; but it was not acknowledged by Houston and wife until April 1st of same year. On the day the deed bears date the deed was presented to one of defendants; but, as it was then drawn, it purported to convey a lot covering only a part of that in controversy, the north and south lines whereof were described as having a length of only 24 feet instead of 44. The court found that, when the paper in this form was presented, one of the purchasers made known to Houston that the north and south lines should be 44 feet long instead of 24, and that Houston said he would correct it, and afterwards delivered the deed as it now stands, signed and acknowledged by himself and wife. The length of the several lines of the lot were given in figures when the instrument was first presented, as are they now, but the figure 2, used in giving the length of the north and south lines, was changed to a figure 4, thus making these lines 44 feet long instead of 24. The court, in effect, found that Houston or...