Estell v. Cole

Citations

• 52 Tex. 170
• 1879 Tex. LEXIS 127

Syllabus

<p>1. Purchaser—Trespass to try title—In trespass to try title, the defendant pleaded, in substance, that the common vendor of both plaintiff and defendant, who was also a party to the suit, had, before tiie plaintiff’s purchase, sold to defendant, who had paid a part of the purchase-money and made valuable improvements; that defendant’s contract of purchase contained no stipulation for its forfeiture, or forfeiture of payment and improvements, on non-payment of the purchase-money notes; that the common vendor had, when defendant bought, falsely represented Ills title to be clear; that he proposed to bring the unpaid purchase-money into court, to be paid on a decree of title protecting- him against the outstanding claim, and that the common vendor was insolvent: Held, That the answer sufficiently excused the failure to pay, to prevent—if true and unrebutted—the forfeiture claimed, and the court erred in striking it out.</p> <p>2. Parties—Equity.—111 a suit by an insolvent, vendor against the vendee to enforce payment of purchase-money for land, the vendee has, ' as against his vendor, the right in equity to have the claimants of an outstanding grant, who assert title, called in, and have the question settled before he can be evicted or required to pay the balance of the purchase-money.</p>