Home/Court of Appeals of Texas/Simmons v. Weis

Simmons v. Weis

131 S.W.2d 103, 1939 Tex. App. LEXIS 302
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 22, 1939
DocketNo. 10658.
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 131 S.W.2d 103 (Simmons v. Weis) 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
Simmons v. Weis, 131 S.W.2d 103, 1939 Tex. App. LEXIS 302 (Tex. Ct. App. 1939).

Opinion

MONTEITH, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Harris County in a trespass to try title action brought by appellants, C. A. Simmons and wife, against Lucy Weis and her husband, R. J. Weis, for the title and possession of 60.45 acres of land alleged to be part of a tract of 202 acres patented to W. B. Slosson, assignee, out of a part of the H. & T. C. Ry. Co. Survey No. 56, in Harris County, Texas. Defendants Weis and wife answered by a general denial and plea of not guilty, the 3, 5, 10, and 25 years statutes of limitations, and disclaimer as to the western portion of the land in controversy. By cross-action they impleaded Grace Agen Vallas, executrix of the will of James H. Agen, deceased, and her husband, Horace H. Valias, on a warranty of James H. Agen. Grace Agen Vallas, as such executrix, joined pro forma by her husband, answered said cross-action by a plea of general demurrer and general denial.

Margaret C. Osgood, by plea of intervention, alleged the ownership in herself of a portion of the land in controversy, and, as defendant, answered by general demurrer and general denial and a plea of not guilty, and the pleas of 3, 5, 10, and 25 years statutes of limitations. By cross-action complaining of C. A. Simmons and wife, she alleged the ownership in herself of approximately the east one-half of the land in controversy.

Appellants answered the plea of intervention of Margaret C. Osgood by pleas of general denial, not guilty, and valuable improvements.

While this action is in the form of trespass to try title it is in fact a boundary suit to determine the location of the south line of the William Waters survey. The particular question for determination is whether the field notes of said- tract of 60.45 acres of land out of the W. B. Slos-son survey place it within the bounds of or outside of the William Waters 320 acre survey.

The case was tried to a jury, who, in answer to one special issue submitted, found the true south boundary line of the William Waters survey to be as claimed by appellees.

Based on the answer to said special issue, judgment was returned against appellants as to the land sued for and in favor of defendants and the intervenor, and that cross-plaintiffs, Weis, take nothing as against Grace Agen Vallas and her husband on their cross-action. Said judgment defined the boundaries of the William Waters survey and found that portion of Section 56, Block 3, Certificate No. 28266, H. & T. C. Ry. Co. Survey in Harris County, Texas, granted by the State of Texas to W. B. Slosson, lying east of the center line of the “Jones Road” to be in conflict with the William Waters survey, and that it is junior, subordinate, and inferior thereto.

For the purpose of illustrating the contentions of the parties we insert map showing the location of the William Waters survey and the surrounding surveys on which its location is claimed by the respective parties to be based:

*105 nXmb77VzO5AKaXEwY7LejUMtKh0BxroPD1CAz3WVXacADBXpjPvLfUf4EzrtPas32qATlbp9JPXmdvTcjvBtK0GWpTxrtb6DyD1IvnKmunNr9l5Z3qE4Czb5oIZsdyepNYFC

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

Related

Giles v. Kretzmeier
239 S.W.2d 706 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1951)
Larrimore v. Emanuel
190 S.W.2d 611 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1945)
Southern Pine Lumber Co. v. Whiteman
163 S.W.2d 212 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
131 S.W.2d 103, 1939 Tex. App. LEXIS 302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simmons-v-weis-texapp-1939.