Home/Court of Appeals of Texas/Sewall v. Waechter

Sewall v. Waechter

268 S.W.2d 262, 1954 Tex. App. LEXIS 2554
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 6, 1954
DocketNo. 12712
StatusPublished

This text of 268 S.W.2d 262 (Sewall v. Waechter) 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
Sewall v. Waechter, 268 S.W.2d 262, 1954 Tex. App. LEXIS 2554 (Tex. Ct. App. 1954).

Opinion

GRAVES, Justice.

This appeal by Blanche Harding Sewall, as appellant, against Fred W. Waechter, as appellee, is from a judgment of the 11th District Court of Harris County, sitting without a jury, Honorable Ben Moorhead presiding, decreeing that the appellee recover of appellant the title to and possession of 40 acres of land, more or less, in the William S. York ⅛ League in Harris County, Texas. It is undisputed that the cause was tried below on the basis of a common source of title to the land, who, con-cededly, was J. H. Cuíten; and there was involved below, and is here, the construction and interpretation of the descriptions contained in the instruments in appellant’s chain of title to the 40 acres, which runs, substantially, unvaried, down through all the instruments, she claims under. The appellee, with what appears to this Court to be accurate, thus in his brief outlines appellant’s chain:

“1. September 15, 1913, deed of trust, J. H. Cuíten et ux to Otis K. Hamblen, Trustee. .

“2. • September 13, 1923, judgment of a District Court of Harris County, ordering a foreclosure, of the lien created by the deed of trust mentioned above.

“3. Order of sale and Sheriff’s return.

“4: January 7, 1924, Sheriff’s deed to The Century Company.

“5. April 19, 1926, deed, The Century Company to Caroline M. Hubbard.

“6. November 8, 1930, Caroline M. Hubbard to Cleveland Sewall.

“7. December 25, 1942, Cleveland Se-wall died, and the appellant is the sole beneficiary under his will, and is, therefore, the successor in title to Cleveland Sewall.”

The only way this Court has been able to understand just what land is so involved, and to apply the contesting claims of the parties to it, is - to make use of the map thereof, which has been brought up with the statement of facts, and is vouched for by both sides as being correct; large as it is, a verified copy thereof is hereto' attached, and made, a part hereof, as Exhibit A.

[263]*263

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

Related

Sanger Bros. v. Roberts
48 S.W. 1 (Texas Supreme Court, 1898)
M. H. Lauchheimer & Sons v. Saunders
65 S.W. 500 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1901)
Cartwright v. Trueblood
39 S.W. 930 (Texas Supreme Court, 1897)
Benavides v. State
214 S.W. 568 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1919)
Livingston Oil & Gas Co. v. Shasta Oil Co.
114 S.W.2d 378 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Wofford v. McKinna
23 Tex. 36 (Texas Supreme Court, 1859)
Farley v. Deslonde
58 Tex. 588 (Texas Supreme Court, 1883)
Nye v. Moody
8 S.W. 606 (Texas Supreme Court, 1888)
Stevens v. Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co.
212 S.W. 639 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1919)
Mosley v. Edds
80 S.W.2d 401 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
268 S.W.2d 262, 1954 Tex. App. LEXIS 2554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sewall-v-waechter-texapp-1954.