Huff v. Webb

Citations

• 64 Tex. 284

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence — Variance.— In trespass to try title to a tract of land which constitutes a portion of a larger survey, a deed which begins the description of the land conveyed at a point on the north line of the survey, when by reference to the other calls it was manifest that the south line was intended, was properly admitted in evidence — it further appearing that to begin on the north line would place the land sued for entirely beyond the limits of the larger tract of which it was alleged to constitute a part, and that no special exception to the petition, which followed the deed in its misdescription of the land, was taken.</p> <p>2. Pleading — Description.— The description of land sued for as contained in the pleadings,which fails to give the course of one of the lines of the survey, is not fatally defective, when, from the course and distance of the lines described, its course is rendered certain.</p> <p>3. Same.— When a misdescription of surveys occurs in the title papers through which a party in trespass to try title deraigns his title, the mistake should be alleged in the pleading. But when this is not done, and the other calls in the deed correct the mistake with reasonable certainty, the objection, unless raised by special exception, will not be heard for the first time when the deed is offered in evidence.</p> <p>4. Acknowledgment — Authentication.— A certificate, formal in other respects, which declares that the party whose name appears to a deed to which the certificate is attached, appeared “and acknowledged that-” had signed, sealed and delivered the same, is not sufficient. The certificate should have shown on its face that he, the one whose name appeared, acknowledged that he executed the same. Following Buell v. Irwin, 24 Mich., 152.</p>