Simmons Hardware Co. v. Davis
| Decision Date | 14 June 1894 |
| Citation | 27 S.W. 62 |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
| Parties | SIMMONS HARDWARE CO. v. DAVIS et al. |
Action by Simmons Hardware Company against E. A. Davis and others. From a judgment of the court of civil appeals affirming the judgment of the district court plaintiff brings error. Reversed.
Morris & Crow and W. R. Heath, for plaintiff in error. E. A. King, for defendants in error.
This was an action of trespass to try title, brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendants in error. The judgment of the trial court was in favor of the defendants, and it was affirmed by the court of civil appeals.
It was agreed between the parties that both claimed under one L. G. Davis, and that he was the common source of title. Upon the trial, the plaintiff introduced in evidence a writ of attachment in its favor against L. G. Davis, together with a levy on the land in controversy as his property; a judgment in the attachment suit against the defendant therein, foreclosing the lien of the attachment on the land, and ordering it to be sold for the satisfaction of the judgment; the order of sale in pursuance of that decree, with the sheriff's return, showing that he had sold the land under the order of sale and that the plaintiff had become the purchaser; and a sheriff's deed, conveying the land in accordance with the sale. The plaintiff then rested, and the defendants offered no evidence. The court then directed a verdict for the defendant, which was accordingly returned. We are of opinion that, when the plaintiff showed a valid title emanating from the common source, it made out a prima facie case. If the plaintiff in an action of trespass to try title, in order to maintain his action, prove that both he and defendant claim from a common grantor, and if, in doing this, he should exhibit the defendant's title, and it should appear upon its face to be superior to his own, he cannot succeed unless he go further, and show that, notwithstanding its apparent soundness, it is for some reason invalid. This is what was meant when it is said in Keys v. Mason, 44 Tex. 140, that a plaintiff shows a prima facie right "by proof that the defendant and himself claim the land under a common source of title, and that his is the better right or superior title under the common source." It is not meant that the plaintiff in every case shall prove, not only that both claim from the common source, but that he shall also show specifically the nature of the defendant's claim, and then attack its validity. Such a rule...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Straus v. Shamblin
...Tex. Civ.App., 144 S.W. 334, writ denied, and authorities cited; McNamara v. Meunsch, 66 Tex. 68, 17 S.W. 397; Simmons Hardware Co. v. Davis et al., 87 Tex. 146, 27 S.W. 62; Keys v. Mason, 44 Tex. 140; Stephens v. Hix, 38 Tex. 656; Broom et al. v. Pearson et al., Tex.Civ. App., 180 S.W. 895......
-
Taylor v. Doom
...they had made out a prima facie case and it then devolved upon appellants to prove the superiority of their title. Simmons Hardware Co. v. Davis, 87 Tex. 146, 27 S. W. 62. William Taylor had the legal title to the land in him, and his wife only had an equity of one-half of the land. When th......
-
Mellenbruch Family P'ship, LP v. Kennemer, 04-17-00637-CV
...defendant [shows] the better right or superior title under the common source." See Davis, 330 S.W.2d at 612 (citing Simmons Hardware Co. v. Davis, 27 S.W. 62, 63 (Tex. 1894) ("[W]hen the plaintiff shows that he has a valid chain of title from a certain grantor, and that the defendant claims......
-
King v. Grisbee, No. 09-05-100 CV (Tex. App. 9/14/2006), 09-05-100 CV.
...that he is owner of the land, and it then devolves upon the defendant to show the authority of his own title. Simmons Hardware Co. v. Davis, 87 Tex. 146, 27 S.W. 62, 63 (1894). As noted above, King admitted his father received no deed from whoever purportedly sold him the 20.33 acres in que......