Paxton v. Meyer

Citations

• 67 Tex. 96
• 2 S.W. 817
• 1886 Tex. LEXIS 621

Syllabus

<p>1. Lis Pendens—Attachment—Purchase—A purchaser o£ property covered by an attachment lien created by a suit in which he whs not a party, who bought before the levy of the attachment, is not defeated by a sale under á judgment foreclosing that lien. But a purchaser after the levy of an attachment is a purchaser pendente lite; and in case the attachment lien be foreclosed by a judgment against an administrator which is-certified to the county court for observance, a sale under an order based upon that judgment and granted upon an application to which he was not a party, will conclude his right.</p> <p>2. Same—Judgment Against Administrator—Practice.—Under the law of this State execution does not issue upon a judgment against an administrator, but it is certified to the county court for observance. The issues concluded by the judgment cannot be reopened in the county court, its duties being those in relation to classification and payment. Those proceedings are to be regarded as administrative, and a continuation of the original suit in which the judgment was rendered, so that purchasers after the institution of that suit are unnecessary and improper parties.</p> <p>3. Evidence.—Ordinarily the statement of a stranger concerning the validity of a title, made to a witness in a suit involving that title, is improper evidence; but it may be admissible upon a point other than the validity of title. See opinion.</p> <p>4. Limitation—Limitation of three years is not available to a purchaser by and subsequent to the levy of an attachment upon the land. A subse- • quent sale under judgment of foreclosure, relating back to the levy of the attachment, divests the title acquired through the deed, and leaves the purchaser unconnected with the sovereignty of the soil.</p>