Stanley v. Hamilton

Decision Date07 December 1895
PartiesSTANLEY et al. v. HAMILTON et al.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Appeal from district court, Taylor county; T. H. Conner, Judge.

Action by J. A. Stanley and others against George Hamilton and others. Defendants had judgment, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed

Posey & Posey and Kirby & Kirby, for appellants. Cockrell & Cockrell for appellees.

HUNTER, J.

It is assigned as error in this case that the court erred in holding that the defendants were innocent purchasers of the land in controversy, for a valuable consideration, without notice of plaintiffs' prior unrecorded deed, for the reason that the deed under which defendants' vendor claimed is a quitclaim deed, and consequently charged them with notice that their grantor had previously conveyed the land. The deed is in the following language.

"The State of Florida, County of Escambia. Know all men by these presents, that I, Margaret E. King, of the state and county aforesaid, for and in consideration of the sum of $950 cash in hand paid by H. A. Tillett, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby bargain, sell, and convey unto H. A. Tillett, of the county of Taylor and state of Texas, the following property, to wit: All those certain surveys of land lying and being situated in Taylor county, Texas (or in any other county in the state of Texas), and state of Texas, originally granted to M. P. King, or to the heirs of said M. P. King, or which may, by purchase, gift, devise, or descent, belong to said M. P. King or his heirs. This conveyance is intended to convey only such of said surveys as the records of said county wherein the lands lay may show to still belong to me; it being intended to convey all of the surveys now belonging to me, as the sole heir of said M. P. King, according to the records of the several counties in which the land lay. To have and to hold unto him, the said H. A. Tillett his heirs and assigns forever, without the terms of general warranty, but this conveyance is intended to be in fee simple. Given under my hand at Pensacola, Fla., this the 12th day of November, 1890. Margaret E. King.

"Which said deed was properly acknowledged and duly filed for record in Taylor county, Texas, on the 17th November, 1890, and properly recorded."

The defendants claimed under general warranty deed to the land in question from H. A. Tillett, dated January 16, 1891, and recorded in Taylor county, where the land lay, on February 16, 1891. The plaintiffs claimed under deed dated 12th day of August, 1870, but not recorded in Taylor...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • American Mortgage Company v. Mouse River Live Stock Company
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 15 Junio 1901
    ... ... bona fide purchaser. Devlin on Deeds, § § 672, 673; ... Schott v. Dosh, 68 N.W. 346; Wilhelm v ... Wilkin, 44 N.E. 82; Stanley v. Hamilton, 33 ... S.W. 601; Baylor v. Scottish Co., 66 F. 631; ... Elliott v. Buffington, 51 S.W. 408; Smith v ... McClaim, 45 N.E. 41; ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT