Wallis, Landes & Co. v. Dehart

• Decision Date: 27 February 1908
• Citation: 108 S.W. 180
• Parties: WALLIS, LANDES & CO. v. DEHART et al.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

108 S.W. 180

WALLIS, LANDES & CO. v. DEHART et al.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

February 27, 1908.

Appeal from District Court, Newton County; W. B. Powell, Judge.

Trespass to try title by J. D. Dehart and others against Wallis, Landes & Co. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal. Reversed and rendered.

E. A. Hawkins, T. J. Beaty, and H. C. Howell, for appellants. J. R. West, for appellees.

WILLSON, C. J.

This was a suit of trespass to try title, brought by appellees, heirs of M. C. Dehart, deceased, by their petition in statutory form, filed October 4, 1904, against appellants, to recover a one-half undivided interest in 270 acres of land in Newton county. From a judgment in favor of appellees, rendered March 19, 1907, appellants prosecute this appeal. Appellants' answer to the petition was a general denial and a plea of not guilty. It was agreed that L. D. Sanders was the common source of title. By a deed dated January 12, 1847, he conveyed the land to John Dehart. While the evidence in the record to show it is not satisfactory, the jury found, and, in deference to their finding, we find that said Dehart and M. C. Dehart were then husband and wife, and as such resided on the land from about 1852 to about 1863, when Mrs. Dehart died. After the death of his wife Dehart continued to reside on the land until December 5, 1867, when, joined by his second wife, Narcissa, whom he had in the meantime (about 1866) married, by a deed of that date, he conveyed the land to John T. Stark as administrator of the estate of Wm. M. Blewett. In a partition of the Blewett estate made in 1884, the land was allotted to A. A. Snell, who, by a deed with covenants of general warranty, dated October 31, 1887, conveyed same to E. A. Seale, who, by a deed with like covenants, dated December 17, 1889, conveyed same to appellants.

By their first assignment of error appellants complain of the action of the court in refusing as requested by them to peremptorily instruct the jury to return a verdict in their favor. The land was a part of the community estate between John Dehart and his wife M. C. Dehart. The one-half undivided interest owned by the latter at the date of her death passed to appellees—her children and grandchildren. So, at the time they instituted their suit, appellees had an equitable title to a one-half undivided interest in the land; and, by force of the deeds under which they claimed, appellants had the legal title to all of it. Patty v. Middleton, 82 Tex. 586, 17 S. W. 909. Whether appellees were entitled to recover the undivided one-half interest for which they sued depended upon whether appellants, or any of those through whom they deraigned their title and whose rights they had acquired, in good faith had purchased the land for a valuable consideration paid, and without notice of appellees' equitable title. Edwards v. Brown, 68 Tex. 331, 4 S. W. 380, 5 S. W. 87; Pouncey v. May, 76 Tex. 565, 13 S. W. 383; Patty v. Middleton, 82 Tex. 590, 17 S. W. 909; Goddard v. Reagan, 8 Tex. Civ. App. 272, 28 S. W. 352. On this issue appellants and each of those through whom they claim, having had it within their power by a properly directed inquiry, before they acquired the Dehart title, to have ascertained the truth with reference to appellees' claim, and the latter, because claiming an equity incapable of registration, being powerless in any practicable way to fix on a purchaser claiming under their father notice of their equitable title, we think the burden should rest on appellants to show that acting in good faith, without notice of appellees' equity, they purchased and paid for the land. But as determined by the Supreme Court, the contrary of...