Miller v. Brown

Texas Supreme Court

Miller v. Brown

23 Tex. 440

DecidedJuly 1, 1859

StatusPublished

This text of 23 Tex. 440 (Miller v. Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Miller v. Brown, 23 Tex. 440 (Tex. 1859).

Pincite

Opinion

Roberts, J.

This suit is brought upon two notes, one of which was given in the purchase of a tract of land, of three hundred and twenty acres, situated in Kaufman county. A vendor’s lien is sought to be enforced. The judgment is for the gross amount of both notes, and the land is decreed to be sold in-satisfaction of this judgment. The vendor’s lien does not extend further than the amount of the principal and interest of the' note, which was given for the land. The judgment is therefore erroneous, as it is rendered. It should be reformed, and rendered so as to show the amount of the judgment, for which the land is liable to be sold under the vendor’s lien. The other note was given for a certificate for land, which is also ordered to be sold. As the defendant in error does not ask that order to be inserted in the judgment here to be rendered, any discussion of the question, as to its legality, need not be indulged in.

Judgment reversed and rendered.

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

Roberts, J.

This suit is brought upon two notes, one of which was given in the purchase of a tract of land, of three hundred and twenty acres, situated in Kaufman county. A vendor’s lien is sought to be enforced. The judgment is for the gross amount of both notes, and the land is decreed to be sold in-satisfaction of this judgment. The vendor’s lien does not extend further than the amount of the principal and interest of the' note, which was given for the land. The judgment is therefore erroneous, as it is rendered. It should be reformed, and rendered so as to show the amount of the judgment, for which the land is liable to be sold under the vendor’s lien. The other note was given for a certificate for land, which is also ordered to be sold. As the defendant in error does not ask that order to be inserted in the judgment here to be rendered, any discussion of the question, as to its legality, need not be indulged in.

Judgment reversed and rendered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 Tex. 440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-brown-tex-1859.