Bailey v. Heirs of Willis

56 Tex. 212, 1882 Tex. LEXIS 19
Texas Supreme Court·Decided February 6, 1882·No. Case No. 851·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Delany, J. Com. App.—

The only question in this case may be stated thus: Did the title of the land in controversy pass out of James McCown by his conveyance to the heirs of Wm. H. and Mary Jane Berkley ? Plaintiff in [215] error insists that the deed is void because it was made to the heirs of persons still living, and there can be no heir to a living person; that the title remained in James Me-Gown, descended to his heirs, and passed by the conveyanee of October 14, 1872. The case is certainly an unusual one. Not only was the deed made to the heirs, but it recites a consideration paid by them, while" the proof shows that the contract was made by the parents, and that they paid the purchase money.

[Opinion delivered February 6, 1882.]

What motive they may have had in taking a conveyance to their heirs we have no means of ascertaining, and any attempt to account for it would be based upon conjecture alone. Our opinion is, that by the conveyance of January 31, 1849, the equitable title at least passed from James McCown, that no beneficial interest descended to his heirs, and that nothing passed to. the plaintiff in error by the deed of October 14, 1872. Our conclusion is that the judgment ought to be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Bailey v. Heirs of Willis, 56 Tex. 212, 1882 Tex. LEXIS 19 (Tex. 1882).

56 Tex. 212 (Bailey v. Heirs of Willis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Vineyard v. Heard
167 S.W. 22 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)