Mauro v. Lavlies, 6715
| Citation | 386 S.W.2d 825 |
| Decision Date | 31 December 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 6715,6715 |
| Parties | Steve MAURO et al., Appellants, v. Roosevelt LAVLIES et ux., Appellees. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas |
Charles Holcomb, Orange, for appellants.
Tom Featherston, Port Arthur, for appellees.
This action was brought to cancel judgment liens and remove the cloud cast upon plaintiffs' premises. Trial was before the court and judgment was rendered for plaintiffs ordering that the abstract of judgment liens do not constitute a lien against plaintiffs' business, homestead and further ordering said liens be removed as a cloud on the title to said property.
The evidence showed that each of the defendants recovered a judgment for debt against the plaintiff, and that an abstract of each judgment was filed for record. Evidence was offered by plaintiffs showing that the property in question was the plaintiffs' business homestead, and the trial court made such a finding in its judgment. No attack is made upon such finding.
The only point of error brought to this court is that the trial court erred in rendering judgment for plaintiffs because there was no justiciable controversy between the parties.
Article 16, Sec. 50 of the Constitution, Vernon's Ann.St. provides that the homestead of a family is protected from forced sale, except for certain enumerated purposes. Article 3832, Vernon's Ann.Civ.St., provides that the homestead of a family is exempt from attachment or execution and every other species of forced sale for the payment of debts, except as thereinafter provided. It is admitted that the debts sued upon by each defendant do not come within these exceptions.
There is no evidence in this record that either of the defendants had made any attempt to have this property sold under forced sale in order to satisfy their judgments. One judgment was dated March 16, 1960 and abstracted March 22, 1960; the other judgment was dated September 4, 1959 and abstracted the same day. This cause was heard in the trial court May 23, 1963.
The abstract of the judgment does not in itself assert any claim of lien upon homestead property. No mention is made of the property which is the subject matter of this suit in the judgment which was abstracted. This case is not one in which an attempt was made by the parties to create a lien upon a homestead for a purpose not permitted by the Constitution and Statutes of this State. Actually, there is no controversy between the parties to be decided....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Katz v. Rodriguez
...place the property owner into a position that if such claim is asserted, it may cast a cloud upon his enjoyment of the property. Mauro v. Lavlies, 386 S.W.2d 825 (Tex.Civ.App. Beaumont 1964, no writ); Texas Development Co. v. Hodges, 237 S.W.2d 436 (Tex.Civ.App. Amarillo 1951, no writ). Alt......
-
In re Henderson
...an abstracted judgment is unenforceable as to a homestead and, therefore, cannot cast a cloud on the homeowners' title, citing Mauro v. Lavlies, 386 S.W.2d 825 (Tex.Civ.App. — Beaumont 1964, no writ) as its supporting authority. The appellate court rejected the bank's argument on two First,......
-
Gill v. Quinn
...the exemption has been interpreted as allowing a judgment debtor to sell and dispose of the homestead without restraint. Mauro v. Lavlies, 386 S.W.2d 825 (Tex.Civ.App., Beaumont 1964, no writ) Of course, a judgment lien attaches to the judgment debtor's interest if he abandons the property ......
-
Hoffman v. Love
... ... Mauro v. Lavlies, 386 S .W.2d 825 (Tex.Civ.App., Beaumont 1964, no writ). In order to meet the needs of ... ...