Smith v. Pate

• Decision Date: 15 December 1897
• Citation: 43 S.W. 312
• Parties: SMITH et al. v. PATE et al.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

43 S.W. 312

SMITH et al. v. PATE et al.¹

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

December 15, 1897.

Appeal from district court, Bell county; John M. Furman, Judge.

Trespass to try title by Martha Pate and others against W. S. Smith and others. From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

W. S. Holman, for appellants. Owens Miller and Bryan & Morgan, for appellees.

KEY, J.

The nature and result of this suit are sufficiently disclosed by the trial court's conclusions of fact and law, which are as follows:

"(1) I find that, in 1878, Robert Holliday owned in fee simple the tract of land described in plaintiffs' petition, said land situated in Bell county, Texas. (2) I find that Robert Holliday died early in the year 1880, in the state of Tennessee, having removed thence from Bell county, Texas, late in the year 1878, and that at his death he left neither wife nor child surviving him, and, further, that he died intestate. (3) I find that the plaintiffs in this suit are the heirs at law of said Robert Holliday, deceased. (4) I find that said Robert Holliday, now deceased, sold and conveyed said land to W. L. Jones, by deed dated November 30, 1878, which deed was duly recorded in the deed records of said Bell county on the 30th day of November, 1878, in which deed a vendor's lien was expressly retained to secure the payment of the purchase money, evidenced by three certain promissory notes, aggregating $1,500, executed by said W. L. Jones, and payable to said Robert Holliday, which notes were by said Robert Holliday left in the hands of W. W. Walker, in Bell county, for collection, in whose possession they remained until they were delivered to and destroyed by W. L. Jones, in the fall of 1880. (5) I find that said W. L. Jones and wife, on the 30th day of September, 1880, executed a quitclaim deed to W. W. Walker, of all their right, title, and interest in and to said land, for the consideration of $1,000, on credit or on time; that said transfer by Jones and wife to said Walker was at the instance of and negotiated by W. T. Bennett, as administrator of the estate of R. Holliday, deceased; and I further find that said Walker executed three notes, aggregating $1,000, for the purchase money for said land; said notes being made payable to said W. T. Bennett, as such administrator, and by said Walker delivered to said W. T. Bennett, in Bell county, Texas. (6) I find that the three notes executed by W. L. Jones to Robert Holliday were unpaid at the death of said Holliday; and that said W. T. Bennett, as administrator, negotiated said transfer from Jones to Walker for the purpose of extinguishing the original debt, evidenced by said three notes, aggregating $1,500, executed by said Jones to said Holliday; and that said Bennett accepted the said Walker notes for $1,000, as extinguishing the original notes; that, after receiving the three notes from Walker, said Bennett then and there released the vendor's lien on said land, and then surrendered the three notes secured thereby, executed to Holliday by Jones, to said W. L. Jones, who then and there destroyed the said notes. Said release was not recorded. (7) I find that said Bennett qualified as administrator of the estate of Robert Holliday, deceased, in the state of Tennessee, but did not qualify as such administrator in the state of Texas. (8) I find that W. W. Walker has paid off in full the said notes, executed and delivered by him to said Bennett as such administrator. (9) I find that W. W. Walker and wife conveyed the land in controversy to defendant John T. Dulany, by deed dated July 31, 1884, the consideration being $350 in cash, and two notes of $750 each. (10) I find that, at the date of the transfer from Jones to Walker, the said Jones, Walker, and Dulany were each and all personally cognizant of the action of the said W. T. Bennett in negotiating the transfer from Jones to Walker, and in accepting the notes from Walker in lieu of the original notes executed by Jones to Holliday, and in surrendering the original notes to Jones. (11) I find that, at the date of the transfer from Jones to Walker, the defendant Dulany offered to give $800 in cash for the land in controversy. (12) I find that plaintiffs claim as heirs at law of said Holliday, and that defendants claim under the deed executed by said Holliday to said Jones. (13) I find that defendant Dulany has had said land inclosed, and has been using, cultivating, enjoying, and paying all taxes due thereon for more than ten years prior to the bringing of this suit against him, on June 24, 1896. (14) I find that the reasonable rental value of said premises, during the time the same has been in defendant's possession, is about equal to the value of the improvements placed thereon by defendant, more than one year before the bringing of this suit. (15) I find that at the death of Robert Holliday, in Tennessee, he owed no debts; and I further find that said W. T. Bennett, as such administrator, has never accounted to plaintiffs, as heirs at law of said Robert Holliday, for any of the proceeds of said estate."

Conclusions of law: "(1) I find, as...