Skip to main content
· 5/11/1883

League v. Rogan

Citations

  • 59 Tex. 427
  • 1883 Tex. LEXIS 189

Syllabus

<p>1. Patent — Void and voidable.— A patent issued by the proper officers of the state upon a valid land certificate, though issued to one claiming under a forged transfer of the certificate, conveys title within the meaning of the statute of limitations of three years. One having a pre-existing right attempted to be conveyed by the forged transfer is not concluded by the issuance of the patent, nor is the state; but as to all other persons the patent is conclusive in favor of the patentee.</p> <p>%■ Same.— Such patent is not void, but voidable only; and the real owner of the certificate, whose transfer thereof was forged, may elect to permit the patent to stand, .and by suit have judgment rendered vesting legal title in himself by reason of his equitable title existing prior to the patent: or he may, by proceedings begun in time,,procure a cancellation of the patent and the issuance of another to himself. This case distinguished from Wright v. Daily, 26 Tex., 730; Harris v. Hardeman, 27 Tex., 249; Eliot v. Whitaker, 30 Tex., 420, and other cases cited.</p> <p>8. Same — Limitation. — Such a patent, io issued upon a forged transfer of a certificate, constitutes such title as will support the plea of limitation of three years. Smith v. Power, 23 Tex., 33, discussed ;.nd distinguished from this case.</p> <p>4. Patent — Title.— A patent issued on n valid certificate by the officers authorized to investigate the patentee’s right to it, and by its issuance to extend title, passes to the patentee the naked legal title. It does not pass the paramount title if the certificate on which it issues belongs to some other person than the patentee; but it does pg,ss, as against the government, title valid in itself.</p> <p>5. Void and voidable.— A title effective against some persons, but not against all persons, is not void but voidable.</p> <p>6. Cases reviewed and discussed. — Varamendi v. Hutchins, 48 Tex., 531, and Burleson v. Burleson, 28 Tex., 417, reviewed and discussed in

Judges: Stayton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced 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.