Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

58 Tex. 86

Sellman v. Hardin

Texas Supreme Court

Decided November 21, 1882

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1882-11-21

Tried below before the Hon. L. D. Bradley. , Action of trespass to try title by Hardin, who filed an abstract of his title, under the heirs of Benoni Middleton, to whom the land was patented. On the trial plaintiff failed to prove a complete chain of title, but did establish title under W. B. Middleton, who conveyed the land September 2, 1867.

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““The evidence * * * was not sufficient to show such adverse possession as would sustain his plea of limitation.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Meredith v. Mitchell

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1882-11-21

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently June 1970

1 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

501882189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Staytox, Associate Justice.

¶1The evidence showed that the parties claimed title from a common source, and that of the appellee, being the older, entitled Mm to recover. R. S., 4802. The fact that *88the appellee filed an abstract of title under which he claimed, that reached back to the sovereignty of the soil, Avhich he did not establish by proof, did not alter the rule.

[Opinion delivered November 21, 1882.]

¶2The rale that a party asserting title under an execution sale must show the execution and judgment under Avhich the sale Avas made, as well as his deed, applies only when the party is seeking to assert title through his deed, and does not apply Avhen such deed is offered in evidence by the party claiming adversely thereto, for the sole purpose of showing that both parties claim from a common source.

¶3The court did not err in holding that the evidence offered by the appellant Avas not sufficient to show such adverse possession as Avould sustain his plea of limitation, and the judgment must be and is affirmed. Harnage v. Berry, 43 Tex., 568.

¶4Affirmed

/58/tex/86 · .json · Public domain