Rancho Camille, S.A. v. Beachum
| Decision Date | 13 March 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 6126,6126 |
| Citation | 596 S.W.2d 632 |
| Parties | RANCHO CAMILLE, S.A., et al., Appellants, v. Dr. Jerry Robert BEACHUM et ux., Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Richard D. Pullman, James M. Schendle, Pullman & Schendle, Dallas, for appellants.
Warwick H. Jenkins, Brenda Jeffers Damuth, Jenkins & Jenkins, Waxahachie, for appellees.
Plaintiffs-appellees Dr. Jerry Beachum and wife Ann Berset Beachum owned approximately 430 acres of land located in Bosque County, Texas. On February 11, 1975, plaintiffs obtained a loan of $134,000.00 from the Federal Land Bank of Houston to pay off an existing indebtedness on the 430 acres. They executed their promissory note to the Land Bank in the principal sum of the loan. The note was payable in installments, the last installment being due on September 1, 2004. Plaintiffs also executed a deed of trust on the 430 acres in favor of the Land Bank to secure payment of the note. Among other conditions, plaintiffs were required under the deed of trust to pay the note installments when due, to keep insurance on the improvements on the land against loss by fire and storm payable to the Land Bank to the extent of its interest, and to pay all taxes when due.
By general warranty deed dated October 26, 1976, and a correction general warranty deed dated April 14, 1977 (correcting only the omission of a mineral reservation in the first deed), plaintiffs conveyed the 430 acres to defendant-appellant Rancho Camille, S.A. It was recited in the deed that Rancho Camille is a Mexican Corporation having its principal place of business in El Limon, Tamaulipas, Republic of Mexico. The consideration stated in both the original and the correction deeds for the conveyance was as follows:
"The sum of Ten Dollars and other valuable consideration . . . and for the further consideration as set forth in Agreement dated October 15, 1976, by and between Jerry Robert Beachum and wife, Ann Berset Beachum, Josefina Juarez de Rodebaugh, Fruticola La Isla, S.A., and Rancho Camille, S.A., to which reference is hereby made for all purposes, and for the further consideration that Grantee hereby assumes and promises to pay, according to the terms thereof, all principal and interest now remaining unpaid on (the $134,000.00 Land Bank note) secured by a Deed of Trust of even date therewith . . . and Grantee hereby assumes and promises to keep and perform all of the covenants and obligations of the Grantors named in said Deed of Trust."
Additionally, in both the original and correction deeds, plaintiffs expressly retained superior title to the property conveyed and a vendor's lien against the property until the $134,000.00 note was fully paid.
The original deed from plaintiffs was recorded in the deed records of Bosque County, Texas, on March 4, 1977; and the correction deed was recorded there on April 14, 1977.
On February 7, 1978, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, by the plaintiffs in our case against Rancho Camille, S.A., Fruticola La Isla, S.A., Donald G. Rodebaugh, Josefina Juarez Rodebaugh, and John W. Swigart. Among other reliefs sought by plaintiffs in the Federal Court case was the rescission of the conveyance of the 430 acres by plaintiffs to Rancho Camille. In connection with the Federal Court suit plaintiffs caused a notice of lis pendens to be filed of record in Bosque County on February 10, 1978, giving notice that the 430 acres, described by metes and bounds, were affected by the Federal Court suit.
Thereafter, on June 26, 1978, the following instruments purporting to convey title to the 430 acres were filed and recorded in the deed records of Bosque County. All were executed on May 27, 1978.
Under the terms of the deeds, the grantee Leisure Multihousing Corporation received the property "subject to but not assuming" the unpaid balance on the $134,000.00 Land Bank note.
Plaintiffs filed the instant suit on December 20, 1978, against defendants-appellants Rancho Camille, S.A., Fruticola La Isla, S.A., Josefina Juarez de Rodebaugh, and Leisure Multihousing Corporation. Plaintiffs pleaded their original and correction deeds to Rancho Camille conveying the 430 acres; their retention of vendor's lien and superior title; Rancho Camille's assumption of payment of the Land Bank note and its assumption of and agreement to perform the covenants and terms of the deed of trust securing the note as consideration for the conveyance; and that Rancho Camille had failed to meet its obligations under those instruments in the following particulars: (1) That the annual principal and interest installment in the amount of $11,647.00 on the note due on September 1, 1978, had not been paid by Rancho Camille, and that the installment was past due and unpaid; (2) that County and State taxes in the amounts of $75.90 for the tax year 1977 and $76.76 for the tax year 1978 had not been paid and remained delinquent; (3) that taxes assessed by the Walnut Springs Independent School District in the amounts of $808.69 (including penalty and interest) for the tax year 1977 and $696.20 for the tax year 1978 had not been paid and remained delinquent; and (4) that the insurance policy insuring the improvements on the property against loss by fire and storm expired on December 1, 1978, and had not been renewed by Rancho Camille. Plaintiffs prayed for rescission and cancellation of their conveyance and deeds to Rancho Camille and for title and possession of the property. Alternatively, they prayed for foreclosure of their vendor's lien and for possession of the property.
Plaintiffs' petition also contained these pleadings in paragraph 6 thereof:
That paragraph was followed by two others pleading the lis pendens notice filed in Bosque County in connection with the Federal Court suit, and the subsequent conveyances of the 430 acres to Defendant Leisure Multihousing Corporation by defendants Rancho Camille, Fruticola, and Josefina Rodebaugh.
Defendants first filed pleas in abatement asserting as grounds therefor (insofar as relevant to this appeal) the admissions set forth in plaintiffs' petition relating to the pending case in Federal Court. Defendants alleged that the subject matter, the issues, the relief sought by plaintiffs (rescission of their conveyance to Rancho Camille) and the parties, excepting defendant Leisure Multihousing Corporation, were the same in the Federal suit and the instant case, and that a trial and judgment in the former action would be a final determination of the issues presented in this action.
Subject to their pleas in abatement, defendants answered with a general denial and the following pertinent special pleas: (1) that the taxes and insurance had been paid and accordingly no cause for foreclosure by plaintiffs existed thereby; (2) that the note payment due on September 1, 1978, to the Land Bank of Houston had been paid by the Federal Land Bank Association of Waco "and accordingly Defendants have kept the covenants and obligations of Plaintiff as set forth in the Deed of Trust"; (3) that plaintiffs should be estopped from foreclosing their vendor's lien because, through their agents and attorneys, they improperly persuaded the Federal Land Bank Association of Waco to refuse to accept full payment of the note by cashier's check from defendant Leisure Multihousing Corporation; and (4) plaintiffs should be estopped from foreclosing their lien because either individually or through their agent they "have taken improper steps to tie up certain property in Mexico which was conveyed to Plaintiffs by certain of the Defendants herein in exchange for the property which is the subject matter of this suit," and "the effect of Plaintiffs' improper actions has been to place said Defendants in a financial situation such that they are for all practical purposes unable to maintain certain of their obligations and covenants to Plaintiffs . . . which Plaintiffs have made difficult or impossible to so do."
Defendants' pleas in abatement were heard by the court on February 21, 1979, and denied by written order dated March 5, 1979. The order recites that evidence was heard on the pleas.
The case was tried on its merits by the court without a jury on March 30, 1979. We shall notice later in this opinion certain offers of payment made by defendants during the course of the trial which they now assert were tenders by them of the full amounts they owed under the proof. After the hearing, judgment was rendered that plaintiffs recover title to and possession of the 430 acres from defendants.
Defendants base their appeal on these three points of error:
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Vito v. Sargis & Jones, Ltd.
-
Wilkins v. Reisman
...Lewis, supra at 895. See also: Crain v. Hill County, 613 S.W.2d 367 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1981, writ ref'd n.r.e.) and Rancho Camille, S.A. v. Beachum, 596 S.W.2d 632 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1980, no writ) (findings of fact not challenged by proper assignment of error on appeal are binding on the......
-
Providence Hospital v. Truly
...challenged on appeal. A finding of fact not challenged on appeal is binding on the parties and the reviewing court. Rancho Camille, S. A. v. Beachum, 596 S.W.2d 632, 638 (Tex.Civ.App. Waco 1980, no Since the settlement was for compensatory damages only, and the trebled damages portion of ap......
-
Farmer's Marine Copper Works, Inc. v. City of Galveston
...or land appurtenant to the easement. Lexington Ins. Co. v. Island Recreational Development Corp., 706 S.W.2d at 756; Rancho Camille, S.A. v. Beachum, 596 S.W.2d 632, 638 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1980, no writ). Based upon the court's implied finding that the railroad owned no fee interest in lan......