Home/Court of Appeals of Texas/Watland v. City of Wichita Falls

Watland v. City of Wichita Falls

286 S.W. 763, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 737
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 23, 1926
DocketNo. 2681.
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 286 S.W. 763 (Watland v. City of Wichita Falls) 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
Watland v. City of Wichita Falls, 286 S.W. 763, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 737 (Tex. Ct. App. 1926).

Opinion

RANDOLPH, J.

This suit was instituted in the district court of Wichita county in. trespass to try title by appellants against ap-pellee for the title and possession of a certain designated tract of land out of a larger tract. The defendant’s answer consisted of general demurrer, general denial', and not guilty, and disclaims as to all but three tracts of land, same being strips of land out of claimed designated streets. The appellee, claiming same as portions of streets which had been dedicated to public use, prays for affirmative relief as to their recovery as such.

The plaintiffs by their supplemental petition specially deny the existence of any such streets and' deny such dedication. Plaintiffs pray, in the alternative, that if any part of said strips was used by the city as a street, it was not more than 20 feet wide and ran parallel with the north line of block 91,. the block of land by virtue of their ownership of which they claim the strips in controversy, and also denying any dedication of either of the other two tracts. Trial was had before a jury upon special issues and on the answers thereto, the court rendered judgment in favor of the appellee for tracts 1 and 2 and for the plaintiffs for tract 3, and from this judgment the plaintiffs have appealed.

There is one question, the decision of which will, in our opinion, dispose of this appeal. If there is any basis upon which the judgment of the court is supported by the evidence, we must affirm such judgment. The question which we think is decisive of this appeal against appellant is that the evidence conclusively shows a dedication of the streets in controversy by the then owners of the land, which was continued by recognition of such streets through the plaintiffs’ *764 chain of title down to the plaintiffs. The following map will give a proper understanding of the lay of Wichita and Front streets in the city of Wichita Palls, and which streets are claimed by the city under dedication to the use of the public:

The following recitals taken from the deeds in the plaintiffs’ chain of title are given for the purpose of showing first, the fact that the field notes or calls recognize the streets called Wichita and Front streets; second, that such streets had a potential existence for many years.

Plaintiffs offered in evidence a warranty deed from Carolina S. Gibbs et al. to W. M. Seely, dated July 6, 1876, conveying the land herein described, with the following description:

“Together with an undivided one-fourth part of all lands, more or less, lying and being situated between Big Wichita street and the Big Wichita river,, on the north side of the Wichita river, and between Front, street and the river on the south side of Wichita river, as desig-rated and shown on the plat of said town, dated July 6, 1876.”
“Tlie following tract of land situated in the-county of Wichita, state of Texas, being a part of a tract of land originally granted to John A. Scott, deceased, late of the state of Mississippi, and now comprehended in plat of town of Wichita Falls, in Wichita county, state of Texas, said town plat being duplicated and acknowledged July 6, 1876, as follows, to wit: “Together with one undivided one-eighth interest in the water power created by the falls in ,the Big Wichita river, in the town of AVich-ita Falls, aforesaid, and also the undivided one-eighth (1/8) part or moiety of the land lying between Wichita street on the north side of the river and Front street on the south side of the -, except such part as is included in blocks 83, 84, and 85, on the north side of the river, as designated on the said plat.”

In the deed from M. W. Seely to Homer Judd et al., dated August 6, 1886, the following statement is found:

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

Related

Aransas County v. Reif
532 S.W.2d 131 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Fenzl v. City of Houston
63 S.W.2d 729 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
286 S.W. 763, 1926 Tex. App. LEXIS 737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watland-v-city-of-wichita-falls-texapp-1926.