McFaddin v. Trahan, 2677.
| Decision Date | 27 February 1935 |
| Docket Number | No. 2677.,2677. |
| Citation | 80 S.W.2d 492 |
| Parties | McFADDIN v. TRAHAN et al. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Jefferson County; J. D. Campbell, Judge.
Suit by W. P. H. McFaddin, independent executor of the estate of Tobe Trahan, against Buck T. Trahan and others, wherein defendants filed a cross-action. From a judgment, plaintiff appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
J. L. C. McFaddin and P. A. Dowlen, both of Beaumont, for appellant.
W. O. Bowers, Jr., of Beaumont, for appellees.
O'QUINN, Justice.
Appellant, as independent executor of the estate of Tobe Trahan, August 7, 1929, filed this suit in the district court of Jefferson county, Tex., against Buck Trahan; the suit being in trespass to try title to and for possession of certain premises described in his petition, and for rental damages. At the same time he sequestered and took possession of the property.
Defendant Trahan on September 11, 1929, filed his original answer, a plea of not guilty. On December 2, 1929, he filed his amended answer consisting of certain exceptions, plea of not guilty, and by cross-action set up claim to the property involved (a house and lot in the Forrest addition to the city of Beaumont), alleging an oral gift of the property to him, in that about the year 1917 Tobe Trahan agreed with defendant Buck Trahan and his wife, Ida Trahan, that if they would live with and care for him during his lifetime, and make a home for him, the property should belong to the said Buck Trahan, whereupon said Buck and Ida Trahan did make a home for said Tobe Trahan and cared for him until it became necessary for them to leave him because of the ill health of Mrs. Ida Trahan; that later said Tobe Trahan again made the same request and renewed his said promise, and, based thereon, he and his wife in 1924 returned to and lived with said Tobe Trahan and cared for him until his death in 1928; and that not until after his death did they know or learn that said Tobe Trahan had not in his will kept his agreement with them and given them the property as they expected he would do. In said answer it was further alleged that said Tobe Trahan could not read or write, and that defendant Buck Trahan believed that said Tobe Trahan, either by will or deed, had carried out his agreement that they should have the property; that defendant and his wife had in all things performed their part of the agreement; and prayed for title to the property, or, in the alternative, that they have judgment against the estate of said Tobe Trahan for the value of their services to him, which was alleged to be the sum of $5,000.
Pending the suit Buck Trahan died and his wife and children were made parties defendant.
Appellant by supplemental petition answered said cross-action by general demurrer, special exceptions, general denial, and specially that the agreement and promise to give the property to defendants, if made, was in violation of the statute of frauds, and that the claim for damages or for pay for services rendered was barred by the two years' statute of limitations.
The case was tried to a jury upon special issues, in answer to which they found that Tobe Trahan did not verbally agree to give the property to defendant Buck Trahan in consideration of Buck Trahan and his wife living with and caring for him, said Tobe Trahan, so long as he lived; that Buck Trahan did render services to Tobe Trahan by way of taking care of and making him a home from February, 1917, to the date of his death; that Buck Trahan, nor his legal representatives, had ever received pay, in money or property, for the services rendered; and that such services were of the reasonable value of $500.
Judgment was rendered in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scott v. Walker
...Lane, Tex.Civ.App., 225 S.W. 61, application for writ of error refused; Caldwell v. Jones, Tex.Civ.App., 63 S.W.2d 761; McFaddin v. Trahan, Tex.Civ.App., 80 S.W.2d 492; Nystel v. Gully, Tex.Civ. App., 257 S.W. 286. But when a contract to devise property in consideration of services is estab......
-
Pearson v. Laws, 9390.
...part of Eklund to pay appellant and his wife for the services rendered under the applicable rule stated in the case of McFaddin v. Trahan, Tex.Civ.App., 80 S.W.2d 492, 493, as follows: "The rule seems to be well settled that, where persons, especially where related by blood or marriage, are......
-
Walker v. Scott, 13217.
...which limitation would run from the time of their performance. Ivey v. Lane, Tex.Civ.App., 225 S.W. 61, writ refused; McFaddin v. Trahan, Tex.Civ. App., 80 S.W.2d 492. It is, of course, the position of counsel that Mr. Bower's agreement to bestow the property by will was an undisputed fact ......
-
Estate of Mahan, In re, 16826
...by the claimant. Chandler v. Prichard, 321 S.W.2d 891, 896-97 (Tex.Civ.App.--Eastland 1958, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Moreover, in McFaddin v. Trahan, 80 S.W.2d 492 (Tex.Civ.App.--Beaumont 1935, no writ), the court stated that the claimant must "allege and prove there was an agreement." Id. at We......