Bitner v. New York & Texas Land Co.
Citations
- 67 Tex. 341
- 3 S.W. 301
- 1887 Tex. LEXIS 880
Syllabus
<p>1. Description.—A description of land contained In a deed is sufficient, if it clearly designates the certificate by virtue of which the land was located and patented, and the deed on its face conveys all the land located and patented under that certificate.</p> <p>3. Improvements—Trespass to try Title.—One who has improved the land of another being in possession bona fide, can not, upon setting up his claim for improvements in a suit involving title, be made to account for so much of the value of the use and occupation as has accrued from the improvements so made by him. (Rev. Stats., Art. 4814.)</p> <p>3. Claim for Improvements—Statute Construed.—Construing section 5, of the final title of the Revised Statutes, as to its effect in trespass to try title on a claim for improvements, when possession was taken and the improvements were made while the Act of 1840 was in force, but the suit was not begun until after the adoption of the Revised Statutes, held :</p> <p>(1) Under the law in force when the defendant took possession of the land and improved it, he had the right to have the value of his improvements allowed him, if made in good faith. On the other hand, the plaintiff had the right to the value of the use and occupation of the premises, including that of the improvements, as an offset to his claim.</p> <p>(3) The right to rent that had accrued before the adoption of the Re- ' vised Statutes, was a vested right, reserved from the operation of the Statutes by their final title.</p> <p>(3) Section 5 of the final title of the Revised Statutes applied as well to the use and occupation, after the Revised Statutes went effect. The privilege which the old Act gave of setting off against the claim for improvements, the value of the use, as well of the improvements as of the land, accrued when the improvements were made, and was a matter of substantial right, and not of remedy merely.</p> <p>(4) The right of a party, who before the adoption of the Revised Statutes, p
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “The appellant in Shealy did not raise an issue of the sufficiency of the evidence.”
- \The appellant in Shealy did not raise an issue of the sufficiency of the evidence.\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gaines
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.