Wallace & Co. v. Campbell

53 Tex. 229, 1880 Tex. LEXIS 60
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedApril 10, 1880
DocketCase No. 3653
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 53 Tex. 229 (Wallace & Co. v. Campbell) 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
Wallace & Co. v. Campbell, 53 Tex. 229, 1880 Tex. LEXIS 60 (Tex. 1880).

Opinion

Gould, Associate Justice.

1. The transcript of the proceedings and decree of the chancery court of Tennessee was properly admitted in evidence, not as a muniment of title to land in Texas, but as showing the nature and terms of the trust attaching to the funds transferred by order of said court to the trustee appointed by the district court of Lamar county to receive them, and attaching also to the land in which said funds were invested by said trustee.

2. The trustee Maxey held the title to the land in which said funds were invested in trust to apply the income to the use and benefit of the cestui que trust, Campbell. The land not to be subject to the debts of said Campbell, and Campbell had no interest therein subject to execution. Nichols, Assignee, v. Eaton, 1 Otto, 727, and cases there cited; Gamble v. Dabney, 20 Tex., 76.

3. The appellants were chargeable with notice of the trust. Having levied on what was at most an equitable interest, with notice that the legal title was held by Maxey, they acquired, by virtue of the registration laws, no better title than Campbell had.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

[Opinion delivered April 10, 1880.]

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

Related

Williams v. Thompson
375 S.W.2d 489 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1964)
Welsh v. Campbells.
41 Haw. 106 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1955)
San Diego Trust & Savings Bank v. Heustis
10 P.2d 158 (California Court of Appeal, 1932)
Spann v. Carson
116 S.E. 7 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1923)
Nunn v. Titche-Goettinger Co.
245 S.W. 421 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1922)
Hoffman v. Rose
217 S.W. 424 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1919)
Nunn v. Titche-Goettinger Co.
196 S.W. 890 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1917)
Holt v. Guerguin
163 S.W. 10 (Texas Supreme Court, 1914)
McClelland v. Rose
208 F. 503 (Fifth Circuit, 1913)
Shelton v. King
229 U.S. 90 (Supreme Court, 1913)
Mason v. Rhode Island Hospital Trust Co.
61 A. 57 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1905)
Sprinkle v. Leslie
81 S.W. 1018 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1904)
Simonton v. White
6 S.W. 675 (Texas Supreme Court, 1899)
Monday v. Vance
49 S.W. 516 (Texas Supreme Court, 1899)
Seymour v. McAvoy
53 P. 946 (California Supreme Court, 1898)
Patten v. Herring & Kelley
29 S.W. 388 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 Tex. 229, 1880 Tex. LEXIS 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wallace-co-v-campbell-tex-1880.