Liddell v. Gordon

Court of Appeals of Texas

Liddell v. Gordon

226 S.W. 459, 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 1149

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedDecember 9, 1920

DocketNo. 2336.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 226 S.W. 459 (Liddell v. Gordon) 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

Liddell v. Gordon, 226 S.W. 459, 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 1149 (Tex. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

LEVY, J.

(after stating the facts as above). [1,2] The evidence, as seen, is conflicting as to adverse possession of the land and as to payment of taxes. The witness Gunn says he bought the land from George W. Liddell and had exclusive possession and management and paid all taxes from March 8, 1905, to February 15, 1910, being about 20 days, less than 5 years. But George W. Lid-dell denies that Frank Gunn was ever in actual possession of the place, or that the conveyance to him was intended to operate as a deed, and that Gunn paid the taxes thereon. And this same witness denies that he, either before the conveyance by him to Gunn or after the reconveyance to him by Gunn, ever had or exercised adverse possession or use of the land against the plaintiffs, but, on the contrary, expressly recognized their interest in the land. The giving of crop mortgages on the land is not necessarily conclusive of adverse possession. It is therefore believed that the court could not, as a matter of law, say that the defendant had title by adverse possession under either the 5 or 10 years’ statute of limitation.

The assignment of error complaining of the peremptory instructions is sustained, and the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

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

LEVY, J.

(after stating the facts as above). [1,2] The evidence, as seen, is conflicting as to adverse possession of the land and as to payment of taxes. The witness Gunn says he bought the land from George W. Liddell and had exclusive possession and management and paid all taxes from March 8, 1905, to February 15, 1910, being about 20 days, less than 5 years. But George W. Lid-dell denies that Frank Gunn was ever in actual possession of the place, or that the conveyance to him was intended to operate as a deed, and that Gunn paid the taxes thereon. And this same witness denies that he, either before the conveyance by him to Gunn or after the reconveyance to him by Gunn, ever had or exercised adverse possession or use of the land against the plaintiffs, but, on the contrary, expressly recognized their interest in the land. The giving of crop mortgages on the land is not necessarily conclusive of adverse possession. It is therefore believed that the court could not, as a matter of law, say that the defendant had title by adverse possession under either the 5 or 10 years’ statute of limitation.

The assignment of error complaining of the peremptory instructions is sustained, and the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

226 S.W. 459, 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 1149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/liddell-v-gordon-texapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack