Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1885, and the Galveston term, 1886. Volume 65. Page: 27
This book is part of the collection entitled: Texas Reports and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1885.] HEIRS OF REDDIN v. SMITH. 27
Opinion of the court.
Tex., 290; Webster v. Mann, 52 Tex., 416; Ufford v.Wells, 52 Tex., 612;
Baker v. Compton, Id., 252; Jackson v. Palmer, Id., 427; Peters v.
Clements, Id., 142; Estes v. Browning, 11 Tex., 247; Secrest v. Jones,
21 Tex., 121; Scarborough v. Arrant, 25 Tex., 130; Greenl. on Ev.,
vol. 1, sees. 108, 109 and notes.
No brief for appellant reached the reporter's hands.
ROBERTSON, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE.-In 1859 W. M. Love made a
parol sale of the land in controversy to Jno. E. Smith, the first husband
of Harriet Smith, and father of the other appellees. Smith
paid upon the purchase a yoke of oxen, entered upon the land and
made valuable improvements, and in 1863, paid upon the land the
additional sum of one hundred dollars. Smith entered the Confederate
service in 1862, and, before leaving, removed his family to
Cherokee county. He died in the army, and after his death, his
brother, D. B. Smith, as agent for his widow and children, kept the
place rented until 1867, when the appellees returned to it. In 1868
D. B. Smith married his brother's widow, and they continued to
occupy the land until December, 1868, when D. B. Smith let the
premises for the succeeding year to D. H. Redden. In December,
1868, the land was sold under execution against W. M. Love, and
bought by G. H. Love, and in April, 1869, G. H. HLove sold to D. H.
Redden. Since December, 1868, the property has been occupied by
Redden, and after his death, by his widow and heirs, the appellants.
On July 8, 1873, appellees brought this suit for the land, tendering
the balance of the purchase money due upon their purchase from W.
M. Love. Afterwards, by amendment, this tender was withdrawn
upon an averment that the rents and revenues of the land enjoyed by
appellants and D. H. Redden exceeded the sum due by them for
the land.
The appellees prevailed in the suit, and the appellants complain of
several matters as error, which will be noticed in the order in which
they are presented in the brief of appellants' counsel.
1. D.B. BSmith, as the husband of Harriet E. Smith, though separated
from her, was, as they had not been divorced, a proper party plaintiff
in the suit, and as D. H. Redden was dead, and the suit was against his
widow and heirs, Smith ought not to have been permitted to testify to
conversations or transactions with Redden. He testified that in December,
1868, he let the premises to Redden for the year 1869, and stated
the terms of the contract. The terms of the contract bore upon no
issue submitted to the jury, and the fact that Redden took possession
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 Tyler term, 1885, and the Galveston term, 1886. Volume 65., book, 1886; St. Louis, Mo.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28509/m1/43/: accessed April 26, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; .