Aldredge v. Aldredge

Court of Appeals of Texas

Aldredge v. Aldredge

204 S.W. 355, 1918 Tex. App. LEXIS 602

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided June 6, 1918·No. No. 1989.·Published

Opinion

LEVY, J.

(after stating the facts as above).

The question in the case is whether the evidence established a trust in the land in suit in favor of appellant; and appellant challenges the third finding of the court that the consideration for the land was paid by T. A. Aldredge. It is believed that the evidence in the record so conclusively shows a joint purchase of the land by T. A. Aldredge and his son Tom Aldredge as to require that finding of fact; and in virtue of this fact, here adopted, the appellant would be legally regarded as having acquired title by purchase from Dr. Florence to a one-half undivided interest. Sachs v. Goldberg, 159 S. W. 92.

The judgment is here so reformed, therefore, as. to allow and establish the interest of appellant in the land as sixteen twenty-fourths thereof, the interest of Susan Al- *356 dredge as seven twenty-fourths, and the interest of Douglass Jones as one twenty-fourth; costs of appeal to be taxed against appellees. The cause is remanded for partition in accordance with this judgment.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

LEVY, J.

(after stating the facts as above).

The question in the case is whether the evidence established a trust in the land in suit in favor of appellant; and appellant challenges the third finding of the court that the consideration for the land was paid by T. A. Aldredge. It is believed that the evidence in the record so conclusively shows a joint purchase of the land by T. A. Aldredge and his son Tom Aldredge as to require that finding of fact; and in virtue of this fact, here adopted, the appellant would be legally regarded as having acquired title by purchase from Dr. Florence to a one-half undivided interest. Sachs v. Goldberg, 159 S. W. 92.

The judgment is here so reformed, therefore, as. to allow and establish the interest of appellant in the land as sixteen twenty-fourths thereof, the interest of Susan Al- *356 dredge as seven twenty-fourths, and the interest of Douglass Jones as one twenty-fourth; costs of appeal to be taxed against appellees. The cause is remanded for partition in accordance with this judgment.

Aldredge v. Aldredge, 204 S.W. 355, 1918 Tex. App. LEXIS 602 (Tex. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

204 S.W. 355 (Aldredge v. Aldredge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related