Sutton v. Sutton

39 Tex. 549
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1873
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 39 Tex. 549 (Sutton v. Sutton) 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
Sutton v. Sutton, 39 Tex. 549 (Tex. 1873).

Opinion

Walker, J.

We have in all cases held that one who purchases land for Confederate money cannot be regarded as a bona fide purchaser for a valuable consideration.

If it cannot be ascertained what portion of the note originally sued on was given in payment for the land, the vendor’s lien cannot be enforced. (Wasson v. Davis, 34 Texas, 168; Swain v. Cato, 34 Texas, 398.)

But Charles F.-Sutton claims that John Sutton held the legal title to the whole of the lands in controversy, by ■ consent of the parties, whilst he was in equity entitled to one-half of" the land, having paid his own money for it.

If this be true, his equitable interest in the "land will entitle him to partition;

The judgment of the District Court is reversed and the cause remanded.

. Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Trison Investment Co. v. Woodard
838 S.W.2d 790 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1992)
Goodwin v. Smith
84 S.W.2d 827 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1935)
Porterfield v. Taylor
171 S.W. 793 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)
Gerstell v. Shirk
210 F. 223 (Seventh Circuit, 1913)
McCauley v. Holtz
62 Ind. 205 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1878)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
39 Tex. 549, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sutton-v-sutton-tex-1873.