Umbaugh v. Miers, 12522

Decision Date11 March 1953
Docket NumberNo. 12522,12522
Citation256 S.W.2d 660
PartiesUMBAUGH v. MIERS et al.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Brian Montague, Del Rio, Frank R. Williams, San Antonio, for appellant.

Morriss, Morriss, Boatwright & Lewis, San Antonio, for appellees.

NORVELL, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order sustaining the pleas of privilege of W. L. Miers and Curtis E. Norman and directing that the case be transferred to Edwards County where they reside.

Appellant, Raymond E. Umbaugh, plaintiff below, relies upon exception 14 of Article 1995, Vernon's Ann.Civ.Tex.Stats., which relates to suits for the recovery of lands. The venue facts under this subdivision or exception are the location of the land and the nature of the suit as disclosed by the petition. The land is located in Bexar County, where the suit was filed, and is referred to in the briefs as the Brooks property. In his prayer to the petition, appellant prays 'for judgment divesting out of the defendants, W. L. Miers and Curtis E. Norman, and vesting in this plaintiff, title to an undivided 1/3 interest in the Brooks property, etc.' An inspection of the petition in its entirety, however, disclosed that the basis of this claim is an executory contract between Umbaugh and Miers, which was allegedly breached by the latter. It is alleged that the Brooks property was purchased by Miers under somne financial arrangement with Norman, whereby the legal title to the property was taken in Norman's name; that Miers and Umbaugh, having theretofore had business relations, agreed that Umbaugh would work for Miers in a supervisory capacity in operating the Brooks...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Traweek v. Ake
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • April 13, 1955
    ...failure of defendants to perform and asked for rescission and damages, therefore it does not come under Subdivision 14. Umbaugh v. Miers, Tex.Civ.App., 256 S.W.2d 660; Lake v. Reid, Tex.Civ.App., 252 S.W.2d Further, it has been held that a suit for specific performance or rescission of a co......
  • In re Custom Home Builders of Cent. Tex. Inc.
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • December 15, 2021
    ...statute did not apply when the principal purpose of the action was not to recover title, despite how the claims were pled); Umbaugh v. Miers , 256 S.W.2d 660, 661 (Tex. Civ. App.—San Antonio 1953, no writ) (holding the predecessor statute did not apply when "the action seemingly is one for ......
  • Williams v. Blalack
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • June 14, 1961
    ...drilled elsewhere he, the plaintiff, owns the interest which defendant acquired from drilling elsewhere. As stated in Umbaugh v. Miers, Tex.Civ.App., 256 S.W.2d 660, 661, on a similar pleading, by Mr. Justice Norvell, 'The allegations of the petition do not show that appellant was possessed......
  • Sammons v. Manning
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • March 4, 1966
    ...facts under this subdivision or exception are the location of the land and the nature of the suit as disclosed by the petition. Umbaugh v. Miers, 256 S.W.2d 660 (San Antonio Civ.App., 1953, no writ In Woodworth v. Rogers, 367 S.W.2d 412 (San Antonio Civ.App., 1963, no writ hist.), it was he......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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