Touchstone v. Staggs

• Decision Date: 06 January 1897
• Citation: 39 S.W. 189
• Parties: TOUCHSTONE et al. v. STAGGS et al.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

39 S.W. 189

TOUCHSTONE et al. v. STAGGS et al.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

January 6, 1897.

Appeal from district court, Brown county; J. O. Woodward, Judge.

Action by A. F. Staggs and others against J. M. Touchstone and others for the cancellation of certain deeds. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal. Reversed.

Jenkins & McCartney, for appellants. Wilkinson & Rice, for appellees.

FISHER, C. J.

This is an action by Staggs, appellee, for himself and minor children, against appellants, to set aside and cancel certain deeds to real estate situated in the city of Brownwood, Tex. The averments are to the effect that the appellees owned certain real estate in Brownwood, and that the appellants owned the patent right to a certain quilter, and controlled territory in which quilters may be sold; that the appellants, who desired to purchase Brownwood property owned by appellees, made certain representations and statements to appellees concerning the value and the quality of the quilter and concerning their control of certain territory in the state of Wisconsin, wherein said quilter could be sold, which they desired to sell to the appellee in exchange for the property owned by him in Brownwood; that certain statements and promises were made at that time by the appellants concerning the ability to sell the quilters in the territory in Wisconsin, and that they could and would dispose of said territory to the advantage and profit of appellees, in the event the trade between them was consummated, and that the appellants would, as a matter of advertisement, and as a matter of advantage to the appellees, open up an office, and advertise said quilters at the World's Fair. Appellee avers that upon the strength of these representations and promises he traded and exchanged his Brownwood property for the right to sell the quilters in the territory within the state of Wisconsin. The theory upon which he based his relief for cancellation is that the quilters were valueless, and sales could not be made in the Wisconsin territory, and the appellants failed and refused to resell the Wisconsin territory for the appellees, as they had promised to do, and failed and refused to open up an office and advertise said quilters at the World's Fair; and that all these statements and promises were falsely and fraudulently made by the appellants at the time of the exchange of properties, with the purpose and intent upon the part of the appellants to defraud the appellees, and with the intention, at the time said statements and promises were made, that they would never be complied with and performed. We understand the law to be that, if a false promise is made about a matter which is material, although it may relate to an obligation to be performed in the...