Dull v. Blum

Citations

• 68 Tex. 299
• 4 S.W. 489
• 1887 Tex. LEXIS 685

Syllabus

<p>1. Deed—Stale Demand—Executory Contract.—A written instrument,, the language of which was couched in the usual phraseology of a dee d purported to convey a designated quantity of land to be taken by the grantee in a rectangular form, wherever he might choose, in' any one of the four corners of a larger survey, and provided that, in the event the grantee should become dissatisfied with the “premises,” then the grantor (or maker of the instrument), would receive back the same, held:</p> <p>(1) No legal title was conveyed.</p> <p>(2) Until a selection was made, no right vested, either to any specific portion of the land, or to any undivided interest in the whole.</p> <p>(3) Nothing was secured by the instrument but the right to make a selection, and to enforce a conveyance of a portion of land that might be chosen.</p> <p>(4) Since no taxes were paid by the beneficiary in the instrument or his assigns; no claim set up for ten years was shown; no record was made of the instrument, and no selection was made of any particular land until twenty years after the instrument was written, it must be presumed that the grantee had become dissatisfied and received back his money.</p> <p>(5) In the absence of facts excusing the long delay in making a selection of the land, the demand was stale as against a claim of title asserted by the heirs of the maker of the instrument, or their assigns.</p>