Hanrick v. Dodd
Citations
- 62 Tex. 75
- 3 Tex. L. R. 301
- 1884 Tex. LEXIS 191
Syllabus
<p>1. Alterations — Civil law.— The civil law was extremely strict in guarding against fraudulent alterations of public documents, and the officers who acted under it will be presumed to have been familiar with its requirements.</p> <p>2. Same.—The civil law required that a public document be clearly written, without blanks, erasures, obliterations or corrections, especially in the substantial parts; or where corrections were made, that they should be authenticated at the foot by the officer. Not only should the words substituted and validated be shown, but also the words abandoned and made void (following Hanrick v. Cavanaugh). This rule applies as well to the testimonio as to the protocol of a title.</p> <p>3. Same — Mexican grant.— Reference may be had to the testimonio of a title, if it be in existence, to test by its appearance whether a change apparent on the face of the protocol was made before or after the title issued.</p> <p>4. Fact case — Verdict.— See statement of case and opinion for facts which were held to fairly support the verdict of a jury finding forgery in the protocol of what appeared to be a grant of eleven leagues of land, dated in 1833.</p> <p>5. Divesting title.— Under the Mexican law, as under the common law, an estate granted by the government cannot be afterwards divested upon mere surmise or suggestion. A formal conveyance or a regular proceeding was requisite to divest title.</p> <p>6. Abandonment—Grant.— When two grants, each for eleven leagues, were shown in the name of the same grantee, the failure to show that a testimonio issued of the first grant raises no presumption that it was abandoned before the second grant issued.</p> <p>7. Forgery — Evidence.— On an issue of forgery of what purported to be the protocol of a grant, it was not error to admit in evidence certified copies of sketches, maps and surveys nearly contemporaneous, made by those who participated in procuring the grant, and having reference to it, to be considered wit
Judges: Gooch
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.