Norris v. Hunt

Citations

• 51 Tex. 609

Syllabus

<p>1. Trespass to try title—Deed—Evidence—Description.—B,. in attempting to deraign title to land, offered a levy by the United States marshal, which was indorsed on the execution describing land levied on as “six hundred and forty acres, L. Dickerson league,”' The return of levy was as follows: “ Levied upon and sold lands in Burleson county, * * * six hundred and forty acres at 13 cents.” The deed by the marshal purported to convey all the interest of “ J. M. Norris in six hundred and forty acres of land situated in the said county of Burleson, and being a part of the league of land originally granted to L. Dickerson : ” Meld—•</p> <p>1. That the ambiguity in the description of the land is patent, and of such a character as to render it void for uncertainty.</p> <p>2. The reasons for the rule which requires that when land is granted it must be identified by the description contained in the grant itself, or by other writing referred to, apply with equal force to a deed.</p> <p>3. A latent ambiguity in a deed in the description of land may be aided by parol testimoiw.</p> <p>4. Parol testimony is not admissible to aid a patent ambiguity in the description of land contained in a deed.</p> <p>2. Distinguished.—This case distinguished from Flanagan u. Boggess, 46 Tex., 330.</p>