Stanglin v. Keda Development Corp., C-3907
| Citation | 713 S.W.2d 94 |
| Decision Date | 15 January 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. C-3907,C-3907 |
| Parties | Charlie L. STANGLIN Petitioner, v. KEDA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Respondent. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
This case concerns an execution sale in which three separate tracts of real estate, collectively valued between $422,000 and $700,000, were sold in bulk for $5,283 to satisfy a $3,710 judgment. The owner of the property, Charlie L. Stanglin, alleged that an irregularity in the execution sale caused the inadequate sale price of the tracts. After a non-jury trial, judgment was rendered voiding the sale. The court of appeals, in an unpublished opinion, reversed the trial court's judgment, holding there was no evidence that the irregularity caused the inadequate price. We have determined there is some evidence of causation and, therefore, reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and affirm that of the trial court.
In 1969, the City of Dallas assessed paving liens against Stanglin in the aggregate sum of $3,710.79 which remained unpaid. In 1974, an agreed judgment was rendered against Stanglin foreclosing those liens and ordering the sale of his properties "according to law in satisfaction of this judgment...." ...." The three tracts were sold in bulk to Keda Development Corporation at the execution sale on February 3, 1981 for $5,283.00.
Stanglin filed suit to set aside the sheriff's deed alleging that the sale of the tracts in bulk, rather than separately, violated Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 3806 (Vernon 1966) and that such irregularity caused the inadequacy in the sale price. Stanglin failed to preserve error as to the debtor's Tex.R.Civ.P. 637 right to designate the order of sale. The trial court held that the sale of the tracts in bulk was an irregularity which caused or contributed to cause the tracts to be sold for an inadequate price, and set aside the deed.
The court of appeals reversed the judgment of the trial court, finding no evidence that the irregular sale in bulk caused the inadequate purchase price at execution. The court of appeals considered testimony that the fair market value of the tracts in bulk was greater than the aggregate fair market value of the tracts separately. The appellate court then held that there was no evidence to support the trial court's finding that selling the property in bulk was an irregularity which caused the inadequate consideration.
When reviewing a judgment on a no evidence ground, the appellate court should only consider the evidence and inferences tending to support the trial court's judgment, and disregard all evidence and inferences to the contrary. Stedman v. Georgetown Savings & Loan Ass'n., 595 S.W.2d 486, 488 (Tex.1979). Although the court of appeals purported to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Gladewater v. Pike
... ... Stanglin v. Keda Development Corp., 713 S.W.2d 94, 95 (Tex.1986) ... ...
-
City of Waco v. Hester
...evidentiary support for the proximate-cause finding, will be reviewed under the applicable standards. See id.; Stanglin v. Keda Development Corp., 713 S.W.2d 94, 95 (Tex.1986). Proximate cause consists of two elements: foreseeability and cause-in-fact. Nixon v. Mr. Property Management, 690 ......
-
McCoy v. Rogers
...is grossly inadequate and (2) that irregularities in the sale tended to contribute to the inadequate price. See Stanglin v. Keda Dev. Corp., 713 S.W.2d 94, 95 (Tex.1986) (holding that execution sale of three tracts in bulk was irregularity that caused grossly inadequate consideration becaus......
-
Keda Development Corp. v. Stanglin
...consideration." The cause was remanded back to this court for further consideration of the other points of error. Stanglin v. Keda Development Corp., 713 S.W.2d 94 (Tex.1986). Upon such consideration we reverse the judgment insofar as it denies recovery for insurance premiums and remand wit......