McAdams v. McAdams

Court of Appeals of Texas

McAdams v. McAdams

20 S.W.2d 360

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedSeptember 19, 1929

DocketNo. 833.

StatusPublished

This text of 20 S.W.2d 360 (McAdams v. McAdams) 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

McAdams v. McAdams, 20 S.W.2d 360 (Tex. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

GALLAGHER, C. J.

T. J. McAdams, ap-pellee herein, sued appellants T. L. McAdams and others not necessary to name in trespass to try title to recover a certain tract of land in Freestone county. Appellants pleaded not guilty, and claimed undivided interests in said land amounting in the aggregate to three-tenths thereof. Appellee filed a supplemental petition, in which he admitted that said land was subject to a charge in favor of appellants in the sum of $90.

A trial before the court resulted in judgment in favor of appellee against all the appellants for the recovery of the land sued for,- and in favor of appellants against appellee for said sum of $90, with a foreclosure of lien on said land to secure the same.

The transcript in this case contains neither motion for new trial nor assignments of error. The judgment rendered is supported by the pleadings. No fundamental error appearing on the face of the record, it is our duty to affirm the judgment of the trial court. J. G. Smith Grain Co. v. Payne (Tex. Civ. App.) 290 S. W. 841, 842, par. 1, and authorities there cited; Clonts v. Johnson, 116 Tex. 489, 294 S. W. 844, 846, par. 3. ‘

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

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

GALLAGHER, C. J.

T. J. McAdams, ap-pellee herein, sued appellants T. L. McAdams and others not necessary to name in trespass to try title to recover a certain tract of land in Freestone county. Appellants pleaded not guilty, and claimed undivided interests in said land amounting in the aggregate to three-tenths thereof. Appellee filed a supplemental petition, in which he admitted that said land was subject to a charge in favor of appellants in the sum of $90.

A trial before the court resulted in judgment in favor of appellee against all the appellants for the recovery of the land sued for,- and in favor of appellants against appellee for said sum of $90, with a foreclosure of lien on said land to secure the same.

The transcript in this case contains neither motion for new trial nor assignments of error. The judgment rendered is supported by the pleadings. No fundamental error appearing on the face of the record, it is our duty to affirm the judgment of the trial court. J. G. Smith Grain Co. v. Payne (Tex. Civ. App.) 290 S. W. 841, 842, par. 1, and authorities there cited; Clonts v. Johnson, 116 Tex. 489, 294 S. W. 844, 846, par. 3. ‘

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 S.W.2d 360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcadams-v-mcadams-texapp-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack