Anding v. Perkins

Citations

• 29 Tex. 348

Syllabus

<p>Where there is no statement of facts in the record, the court will presume, in support of the judgment, that everything was proved which could legally be proved under the issues. But where there were no pleadings to support the verdict of the jury, and the issues in the pleadings did not warrant the charge to the jury, the judgment will he reversed. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 1490, Note 582.)</p> <p>Sedgwick declares the rule that, in an action brought on a warranty, the true measure of damages is the difference between the value which the thing sold would have brought at the time of the sale, if it had been sound or corresponding to the warranty, and its actual value with the defect. The price paid is strong, but not conclusive evidence.</p> <p>The court has held that, where there is a failure of title, the measure of damages is the sum paid for the article, with interest from the time it was paid. (Anderson v. Duffield, 8 Tex., 237; Scranton v. Tilley, 16 Tex., 183.)</p> <p>Where the plaintiff sold a land certificate with warranty of title, and it proved to be a spurious unrecommended certificate, in -the absence of any averment of fraud the necessary measure of damages is the purchase-money, with interest. (Paschal’s Dig., Note 540.)</p> <p>Fraud, coupled with concealment of the cause of action, will suspend the running of the statute, and 'entitle the plaintiff to an action upon the discovery of the fraud, or at such time as he might have done so by the use of reasonable diligence. And if a party sell a forged land certificate, the ordinary diligence was when the proper land officer discovered the spuriousness of the title. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 4604, Note 1017.)</p>