Aldredge v. Aldredge

Court of Appeals of Texas

Aldredge v. Aldredge

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

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 6, 1918

DocketNo. 1989.

StatusPublished

This text of 204 S.W. 355 (Aldredge v. Aldredge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

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

Pincite

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 S.W. 355, 1918 Tex. App. LEXIS 602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aldredge-v-aldredge-texapp-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack