Watson v. Markham & Reese

• Decision Date: 11 November 1903
• Citation: 77 S.W. 660
• Parties: WATSON et al. v. MARKHAM & REESE.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

77 S.W. 660

WATSON et al. v. MARKHAM & REESE.^*

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

November 11, 1903.

Appeal from District Court, Falls County; Sam R. Scott, Judge.

Suit by J. L. Markham and another against F. M. Watson and others on an account and to foreclose a mechanic's lien. From a judgment in favor of complainants, defendants the Falls County Gin Company and another appeal. Reversed in part and in part affirmed and rendered.

J. W. Spivey, for appellants. Rice & Bartlett, for appellees.

FISHER, C. J.

This is a suit brought on the 29th day of March, 1900, by J. L. Markham and M. A. Reese, composing the firm of Markham & Reese, against F. M. Watson, on an account for building material, amounting to $146.30, and to foreclose an alleged mechanic's lien as against F. M. Watson and the other defendants on a certain lot of land and improvements in the town of Lott, Falls county, Tex. Plaintiffs alleged, in substance, that during the year 1899 the defendant Watson was the owner and in possession of a portion of block No. 215 in the said town of Lott, describing it, upon which was then and is now situated a certain gin and outhouses known as the "Watson Gin Property"; that during said time, to wit, from the 29th day of July, 1899, to the 13th of September, 1899, said Watson purchased certain items of lumber, brick, cement, and other building material, which were used in making improvements on said lot, and amounting to $152.06, less a credit of $4.07, and which balance Watson failed and refused to pay; that plaintiffs hold a valid lien on said lot and improvements by reason of the fact that on September 27, 1899, they delivered to the county clerk a correct itemized account of said material, which was duly verified and recorded as required by law; that the Falls County Gin Company and T. L. Hollingsworth, defendants, were in possession, or claimed some interest in said premises, which was alleged to be inferior to the lien asserted by them; and plaintiffs prayed "that on final hearing it have judgment for its debt, damages, and interest, with establishment and foreclosure of its lien against each and all of the defendants, for order of sale and writ of possession, for costs of suit, and for general and special relief." The defendants T. L. Hollingsworth and the Falls County Gin Company answered by general and special exceptions, general denial, and by special answer alleged that said Watson was not in fact the owner of the premises at the time alleged, in this: that said T. L. Hollingsworth, prior thereto, being the owner of said property, did convey the same to said Watson for the consideration of $6,000 to be paid by said Watson, as evidenced by five promissory notes, each for the sum of $1,200, bearing 10 per cent. interest from date, and due, respectively, on the 1st of October of the years 1898, 1899, 1900, 1901, and 1902, and that the vendor's lien was reserved in said conveyance and in said notes to secure the payment of same; that, no part of said notes or interest thereon being paid, the said Watson thereafter conveyed said property to said Hollingsworth in consideration of the cancellation of said notes and vendor's lien, and said Hollingsworth, without any knowledge of the pretended claims of the plaintiffs herein, thereafter conveyed said property to defendant the Falls County Gin Company. And, further, defendants answered that at the time it is alleged that plaintiffs furnished the material for the improvement of the premises in controversy the said defendant Watson was the head of a family, was living on said premises with his family, consisting of a wife and children, and the same constituted his homestead, and was exempt from any character of forced sale; that the said Watson nor his wife ever gave any lien...