Collins v. McCarty

Citations

• 68 Tex. 150
• 3 S.W. 730
• 1887 Tex. LEXIS 656

Syllabus

<p>1. Limitation.—When the legal title to land is vested in a trustee for the-benefit of another, limitation will run against such trustee in favor of an adverse claimant in possession; when the bar of the statute is complete against the legal title vested in the trustee, it applies also to the equitable title of the cestui que trust, and this though the latter be a woman under coverture.</p> <p>2. Same.—The doctrine above announced is not applicable where a claim is-set up through the trustee as against the cestui que trust, or against those claiming under the latter. Neither can it affect the rights of one laboring under disability when the cause of action arose, if at that time the legal title existed in him, though the control of the property was entrusted to another.</p> <p>3. Same.—If the cause of action arose from a breach of trust on the part of the trustee, other than his negligence in failing to sue within the period! of limitation, then limitation would not run against the cestui que trust. In every ease when loss results from the mere negligence of the trustee, the remedy of the cestui que trust is in an action against him.</p> <p>4. Gases Disapproved.—The doctrine announced regarding limitation in' Bacon v. Gray, 23 Mississippi, disapproved.</p> <p>5. Cases Followed.—The cases of Wingfield v. Virgin, 51 Georgia, 139, Williams v. Otey, 8 Humphreys, 563; Molton v. Henderson, 62 Alabama, 426; Smilie v. Biffle, 2 Pennsylvania State, 52, and other cases cited in the opinion regarding the effect of limitation on the mere equitable title; cited and followed.</p>