Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas, during the latter part of the Austin term, 1884, and the Tyler term, 1884. Volume 62. Page: 423
xxii, 836 p., 22 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1884.] FRANKLAND v. CASSADAY. 423
Opinion of the court.
The report of the case (55 Tex., 452) plainly evinces that the
question then, as now, decisive of its merits was the determination
of the question whether, under the deed of assignment, the decree
of court, the sale of the land under it to John A. Wharton, and the
corresponding execution of the deed to Wharton, and of purchase
notes, and mortgages payable to and made to Lanfear, had the effect
to leave remaining in the estate of Jones, the superior title to the
land.
The statement of the case made by the reporter shows these facts
as being those upon which the supreme court was required to decide
in determining that question. The clear, concise and logical opinion
of Judge Quinan leaves no room for doubting that in passing
upon that question the relation and effect of these several instruments
to the subject and the legal consequence under the deed of
assignment and decree of court o f rt fthe purchase money notes being
made payable to Lanfear, and the mortgages given to him to secure
their payment, in determining whether the estate of Jones still retained
the superior title, or whether it was lost, were distinctly the
subjects of judicial consideration and authoritative determination.
The brief of counsel for plaintiff in error presents eight propositions
under the assignment of error which has been stated. These
propositions, in the main, question the correctness of the decision of
the supreme court upon the ground that on several points which the
brief attributes to the opinion,that the evidence either did not warrant
the assumption of a given fact or facts, or else that the conclusion
of law or fact placed by the court upon the evidencewas not
,supported by the evidence, or was unwarranted by it.
On most, if not all, of such propositions, we conceive that the
points thus made are not relevant to the merits of the case as the
same was viewed by the learned judge who pronounced the opinion.
The questions made in the propositions alluded to, we think, with
due consideration to the views of the able counsel, indicate a misconception
of the real grounds on which the opinion was rested,
holding that the legal title to the land was not in Frankland.
The introductory portion of the opinion is devoted, it is true, to
maintaining the proposition that where the vendor parts with the
notes and security given for the purchase money he cannot be said
to retain any longer any title to the land; but the opinion does not
rest the reversal of the judgment on the ground that the purchase
money notes, being made payable to Lanfear, and the mortgages
given to secure them being made to him, constituted that transaction
such a dealing with a third person as brought the question of
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas, during the latter part of the Austin term, 1884, and the Tyler term, 1884. Volume 62., book, 1885; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28512/m1/445/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; .