Murphy v. Luttrell
| Decision Date | 20 May 1909 |
| Citation | Murphy v. Luttrell, 120 S.W. 905, 56 Tex.Civ.App. 149 (Tex. App. 1909) |
| Parties | MURPHY et al. v. LUTTRELL et al. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Bowie County; P. A. Turner, Judge.
Trespass to try title by T. N. Luttrell and others against John W. Murphy and others. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Reversed, and judgment rendered.
Smelser & Vaughan and M. L. Harkey, for appellants. A. A. Ablowich, for appellees.
This is a suit in trespass to try title, instituted by the appellees against the appellants to recover a tract of land situated in Bowie county. The appellees claim as the heirs and purchasers from the heirs of William McDonald, who was the owner of a headright certificate authorizing him to locate and survey a league and labor of land, issued in 1838. They rely for title upon a location and survey made upon the land sued for by virtue of an unlocated balance of this headright certificate. McDonald died some time about 1849, but prior to his death transferred a one-half interest in his certificate to one T. W. Clark. The record shows that in 1872 a tract of land in Bowie county, including that in controversy, was surveyed for one John L. Riddle, purporting to be done by virtue of the McDonald certificate, or rather of one issued for the unlocated balance due upon that certificate. Whether Riddle was the owner of the certificate, or was merely an agent acting for the real owners in having the land located and surveyed, does not appear. The field notes of this survey were promptly returned to the land office; but no patent ever issued because the location was in conflict with an older survey made for the De Kalb College, and this was noted upon the returns made. Aside from this objection, the location and survey appear to have been regular and made according to the legal requirements then existing. The appellants, defendants below, pleaded not guilty, and to defeat the claim of title offered in evidence by the appellees they offered the following: (1) The record of a survey for 1,211 acres made for the De Kalb College in 1843, which was subsequently shown to include the tract here involved; (2) a certified copy of a certificate issued by the clerk of the district court of Red River county in 1841, certifying that certain individuals, naming them, as the trustees of De Kalb College, were entitled to a survey of four leagues of land in accordance with a statute approved January 26, 1839, by the Congress of the Republic of Texas, and reciting that an application had been made to the district court for a certificate for the land, and that the court, in response, had decreed that the trustees and their successors in office were entitled to one league of land, being one of the four leagues above mentioned, to be surveyed and located on any lands not otherwise appropriated, for the benefit and use of the De Kalb College; (3) a patent from the state issued to the trustees of the De Kalb College, dated May 24, 1907; (4) deeds from the De Kalb College, signed by the president and secretary, conveying the land sued for to the appellants. It was also shown that the field notes of this survey were returned to the land office in 1855. The case was tried before the court without a jury, and judgment rendered in favor of the appellees, awarding them the land sued for.
The court filed no findings of fact or conclusions of law, and we are not advised as to what formed the basis of the judgment. We think, however, that the controlling question is one of title as between the appellees, who claim under the location made by virtue of the certificate issued to William McDonald, and the appellants, claiming through the patent issued to the De Kalb College, or upon the fact that the De Kalb College held a superior outstanding title. In suits of this character the plaintiffs in the case must recover, if at all, upon the strength of their own title, and not upon the weakness of the claim of their adversaries. We shall assume that the evidence is sufficient to connect the appellees by inheritance and otherwise with the ownership of the McDonald certificate located and surveyed for John Riddle upon the land in controversy, and that the location and survey and the return of the field notes were all done regularly and in the manner required by the existing law, and shall consider the strength of their title from that standpoint. This would be evidence sufficient to show prima facie an appropriation of the land and an equitable right to the title and possession; but upon the production of a patent issued by the state to another the prima facie case was overcome, and the burden rested upon the appellees to show a legal or equitable right to the land superior to that of the patentee. Johnson v. Eldridge, 49 Tex. 507; Miller v. Browson, 50 Tex. 591; Deen v. Wills, 21 Tex. 649; Miller v. Moss, 65 Tex. 181; Clements v. Egleston, 2 Posey, Unrep. Cas. 483; Rutherford v. French, 2 Posey, Unrep. Cas. 725. It is true this patent was not issued to the college for this particular land until the year 1907; but when issued it vested in the college the absolute right to the land except as against the state or some one having a prior legal or equitable claim. Wood v. Durrett, 28 Tex. 438; McLeary v. Dawson, 87 Tex. 535, 29 S. W. 1044. The De Kalb College was created by an act of the Congress of the Republic of Texas passed January 26, 1839. 2 Laws of the Republic of Texas 1838-39, p. 128. The provisions of the act material to this controversy are as follows:
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
-
Webster v. International & G. N. Ry. Co.
...52 Tex. Civ. App. 233, 113 S. W. 22; Bailie v. Western Live Stock & Land Co., 55 Tex. Civ. App. 473, 119 S. W. 325; Murphy v. Luttrell, 56 Tex. Civ. App. 149, 120 S. W. 905; White v. McCullough, 56 Tex. Civ. App. 383, 120 S. W. 1093; Ward v. Nelson, 62 Tex. Civ. App. 281, 131 S. W. 310; Lef......
-
State v. Dyer
...proceeding instituted for that purpose. Galveston H. & S. A. R. Co. v. State, 81 Tex. 572, 595, 17 S.W. 67; Murphy v. Luttrell, 56 Tex.Civ.App. 149, 120 S.W. 905, 909; Moseby v. Burrow, 52 Tex. 396; 13 Am.Jur. p. 1187, Sec. 1335; 19 C.J.S. Corporations Sec. 1649, p. 1420. Such suit, in the ......
-
Jordan v. Grandfield Bridge Co.
...a familiar rule that a party to a suit may avail himself of title acquired, pending the suit and before final trial. Murphy v. Luttrell, 56 Tex. Civ. App. 149, 120 S. W. 905; Schmidt v. Huff, 7 Tex. Civ. App. 593, 28 S. W. 1053; Compton v. Jennings (Tex. Civ. App.) 266 S. W. Article 7085, c......
-
Trustees of College of De Kalb v. Williams
...which league are hereby remitted and donated to the said institution." See 2 Gammel's Laws of Texas, page 142. In the case of Murphy v. Luttrell, 120 S. W. 905, this court had before it a controversy in which the continued existence of the College of De Kalb as a corporate entity was denied......