Belcher v. Fox

Citations

• 60 Tex. 527
• 1883 Tex. LEXIS 371

Syllabus

<p>1. Deeds—Forgery — Evidence.— The burden of proof, where the plea of non est factum brings in issue the forgery of certain deeds, being on the parties holding under such deeds, evidence as to the reputation of the subscribing witnesses does not of itself alone establish the genuineness of the deeds in question. The execution of such deeds being not sufficiently proved by such evidence alone, it is error to permit copies from the record, or even the originals, to be admitted in evidence. Holmes v. Coryell, 58 Tex., 685; Newby v. Haltaman, 43 Tex., 317, and other cases cited.</p> <p>%. Same.— A deed between the same parties, which may be in every respect legal, but relating to land in no way connected with that in controversy, is inadmissible to prove up an instrument whose forgery is alleged.</p> <p>3. Charge of the court.— A charge as to outstanding title is erroneous, where there is no evidence as to that subject introduced.</p> <p>4. Community property — Measure of value.— Where the land certificate is community property, which after the death of the mother is conveyed by the father, in the absence of some fact giving him power to convey, the children must be entitled to one-half of the land, less the value of such property as they have received from their father or his estate. The rule as to the determination of the value of the community property, sold without authority by the surviving parent, is, that the property should be valued as at the time it is received from the surviving parent or his estate. Sparks v. Spence, 40 Tex., 702, cited and followed.</p>