Norwood v. Snell

• Decision Date: 09 June 1902
• Citation: 68 S.W. 773
• Parties: NORWOOD v. SNELL et al.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

68 S.W. 773

NORWOOD v. SNELL et al.

Supreme Court of Texas.

June 9, 1902.

Certified question from court of civil appeals of Third supreme judicial district, Red River county.

Action by P. T. Norwood against W. K. Snell and others. On certified questions from the court of civil appeals of the Third judicial district.

W. T. Armistead, Dan T. Leary, and Geo. T. Vaughan, for appellant. Chambers, Dook & Kennedy, for appellees.

BROWN, J.

The court of civil appeals of the Third supreme judicial district has certified to this court the following statement and question:

"There is now pending in this court cause No. 2,792, styled `P. T. Norwood v. W. K. Snell et al.,' an action of trespass to try title by the appellant against the appellees. Judgment of the trial court was in favor of the appellees, defendants below. Appellant deraigned title through the administration of the estate of one R. C. Hemmingway, whereof John H. Caudle was administrator, formerly in the district court of Red River county. Plaintiff offered in evidence so much of the probate records of the February term, 1868, of the county court of Red River county, as tended to show an order of the court to sell the land in controversy. Preceding this order was an application and petition for the sale of the land in controversy. The order offered in evidence is as follows: `February Term, 1868. W. M. Harrison v. The Estate of R. C. Hemmingway, Deceased. Petition to Compel Administrator to Sell Land for Cash: This cause coming on to be heard on application of plaintiff, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that it would be to the interest of the estate to sell said land on a credit of twelve months, it is therefore ordered by the court that the administrator proceed to sell said land on a credit of twelve months, bond with approved security retaining a lien on land for payment of purchase money, after giving legal notice, to satisfy plaintiff's demand, on the first Tuesday in April,'—to the introduction of which the defendant objected on the ground that the county judge presiding over said court failed to sign said probate record and the minutes of said county court for the term at which said order was made, and for lack of the signature of the county judge to the minutes, and no evidence was introduced to show that the order was in fact made by the court, said order is a nullity; and, further, that said order does not describe the land the sale of which it purports to order. And, further, no application by the administration was shown to sell said land, but the order was made on application of a creditor, without requiring the administrator to show cause why he should not apply for said order. Which objections were by the court sustained, and said order of sale was excluded, to which ruling of the court the plaintiff then and there excepted. Appellant also offered in evidence so much of the probate records as shows an order entered at the June term, 1868, as follows: `J. H. Caudle, Administrator, v. The Estate of R. C. Hemmingway. Petition to Sell Land to Enforce Vendor's Lien. This cause coming on to be heard on application of J. H. Caudle, administrator of the estate of R. C. Hemmingway, deceased, to sell the land to enforce vendor's lien, it is ordered by the court that said administrator proceed to sell the land on credit of twelve months, taking bond with...