Chew v. De Ware

Court of Appeals of Texas

Chew v. De Ware

207 S.W. 988, 1918 Tex. App. LEXIS 1291

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 12, 1918

DocketNo. 1903. [fn*]

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 207 S.W. 988 (Chew v. De Ware) 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

Chew v. De Ware, 207 S.W. 988, 1918 Tex. App. LEXIS 1291 (Tex. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

LEVY, J.

(after stating the facts as above). [1-3] The original locating surveyor of the Robert Potter survey, as found by the jury, actually established on the ground and marked for identification the northwest corner of the survey at a post oak tree marked “R. P.” near the water’s edge of Perry or Caddo Lake. An established original corner must govern and control. Accordingly, the other calls in the patent for the west line will be followed from the established northwest comer. These calls are for the meanders of the lake, and, as found by the jury, the original locating surveyor of the Robert Potter survey intended to make the water’s edge and the meanders of Perry or Caddo Lake the west boundary line of the survey. The identification on the ground of the footsteps of the surveyor determines the true boundary. Hughes v. State, 57 Tex. Civ. App. 306, 123 S. W. 177. Therefore the west boundary line of the Robert Potter survey will in this case follow the meanders of the lake; for, as found by the jury, the receding of the waters of the lake on the west boundary line of the survey was slow and gradual, and where the change is gradual and imperceptible the boundaries extend to the waters. 5 Cyc. 904; Tiedeman on Real Property, § 489; 1 R. C. L. p. 230.

We have carefully examined all the assignments in the case, and conclude that no error exists that warrants a reversal of the judgment.

Affirmed.

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

LEVY, J.

(after stating the facts as above). [1-3] The original locating surveyor of the Robert Potter survey, as found by the jury, actually established on the ground and marked for identification the northwest corner of the survey at a post oak tree marked “R. P.” near the water’s edge of Perry or Caddo Lake. An established original corner must govern and control. Accordingly, the other calls in the patent for the west line will be followed from the established northwest comer. These calls are for the meanders of the lake, and, as found by the jury, the original locating surveyor of the Robert Potter survey intended to make the water’s edge and the meanders of Perry or Caddo Lake the west boundary line of the survey. The identification on the ground of the footsteps of the surveyor determines the true boundary. Hughes v. State, 57 Tex. Civ. App. 306, 123 S. W. 177. Therefore the west boundary line of the Robert Potter survey will in this case follow the meanders of the lake; for, as found by the jury, the receding of the waters of the lake on the west boundary line of the survey was slow and gradual, and where the change is gradual and imperceptible the boundaries extend to the waters. 5 Cyc. 904; Tiedeman on Real Property, § 489; 1 R. C. L. p. 230.

We have carefully examined all the assignments in the case, and conclude that no error exists that warrants a reversal of the judgment.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 S.W. 988, 1918 Tex. App. LEXIS 1291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chew-v-de-ware-texapp-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack