McDowell v. Fowler
| Decision Date | 24 April 1891 |
| Citation | McDowell v. Fowler, 16 S.W. 431, 80 Tex. 587 (Tex. 1891) |
| Parties | McDOWELL v. FOWLER. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Taylor & Bell, for appellant.
This was an action of trespass to try title, brought in the court below by the appellant against appellee.There was a trial before the court without a jury, and a judgment for the defendant.There is neither a bill of exceptions nor a statement of facts in the record; and the only assignment of error is, in effect, that the court erred in rendering judgment for the defendant.There is a written agreement purporting to be signed by the attorneys for both parties, in which it is stipulated, in substance, that the sole question in the case is as to the proper construction of a power of attorney from G. W. Fisher to one Mounts, a copy of which is attached to the agreement.If the power of attorney was sufficient to authorize Mounts to convey Fisher's interest in the land in controversy, the judgment was to be for the plaintiff; otherwise it was to be for the defendant.The agreement, not having been incorporated into a statement of...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Parrish v. Wright
...59 Tex. 315; Whitaker v. Gee, 61 Tex. 217; Trinity & S. Railway v. Lane, 79 Tex. 643, 15 S. W. 477, 16 S. W. 18; McDowell v. Fowler, 80 Tex. 587, 16 S. W. 431; M., K. & T. Railway Co. v. Fisher [Tex. Civ. App.] 47 S. W. 284, writ of error denied; Williams v. Young, 41 Tex. Civ. App. 212, 90......
-
Cousins v. Cousins
...[Tex. Civ. App.] 256 S. W. 1006), and the court will consider only such matters as are incorporated into the statement (McDowell v. Fowler, 80 Tex. 587, 16 S. W. 431), and will overrule assignments involving questions not raised or embraced in the agreed case (Eastland v. Williams' Estate, ......
-
Carlton v. Krueger
...S. W. 482; Smith v. Hallwood Cash Reg. Co., 97 Md. 354, 55 Atl. 525; Davis v. Union Trust Co., 150 Ind. 46, 49 N. E. 817; McDowell v. Fowler, 80 Tex. 587, 16 S. W. 431. Article 1411 of the Revised Statutes of 1895 says: "The transcript shall, except in cases hereinafter provided, contain a ......
-
Darr v. Johnson
...test the correctness of the court's judgment attempted to be appealed from, this court must presume that it is correct. McDowell v. Fowler, 80 Tex. 587, 16 S. W. 431. The majority are of the opinion that the agreed facts appearing in the record signed by counsel for the respective parties s......