Kanz v. P. J. Willis & Bro.

40 S.W. 171, 16 Tex. Civ. App. 12, 1897 Tex. App. LEXIS 145
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 1, 1897
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 40 S.W. 171 (Kanz v. P. J. Willis & Bro.) 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
Kanz v. P. J. Willis & Bro., 40 S.W. 171, 16 Tex. Civ. App. 12, 1897 Tex. App. LEXIS 145 (Tex. Ct. App. 1897).

Opinion

WILLIAMS,

Associate Justice.—This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of appellee, a private corporation, against appellant, for a tract of land in controversy between them. The only question involved is as to the sufficiency of the indexing of an abstract of a judgment under which appellee claimed, and which was essential to its title.

The judgment was one recovered by appellee, as a corporation, against J. 0. Mullen and G. W. Allen, and an abstract of it was filed and registered in ,the office of the county clerk of Lavaca County. The index made of the registration was as follows:

Under the letter “W”: “Willis, P. J., & Bro. vs. J. C. Mullen and G. W. Allen, p. 293.” Under the letter “M”: “Mullen, J. 0., and G. W. Allen, P. J. Willis vs., p. 293.” Under the letter “A”: “Allen, G. W., and J. C. Mullen, P. .J. Willis vs.”

Appellee claimed the land in controversy under a sale by virtue of an execution on this judgment, and appellant claimed under a deed from J. 0. Allen, both subsequent to the registration of the abstract.

*13 We are of the opinion that the names of both plaintiff and defendants in the judgment appear from the index, and that it was sufficient to give rise to the statutory lien on the property of the judgment debtors. Burnett v. Cockshott, 21 S. W. Rep., 950; Glasscock v. Stringer, 32 S. W. Rep., 923.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Houssels v. Coe Hampton
159 S.W. 864 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1913)
McLarry v. Studebaker Bros. Co. of Texas
146 S.W. 676 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
40 S.W. 171, 16 Tex. Civ. App. 12, 1897 Tex. App. LEXIS 145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kanz-v-p-j-willis-bro-texapp-1897.