Skip to main content
· 6/25/1887

Presidio Mining Co. v. Bullis

Citations

  • 68 Tex. 581
  • 4 S.W. 860
  • 1887 Tex. LEXIS 732

Syllabus

<p>1. Separate-Property—Contract.—'When time is of the essence of a contract made by the husband and wife pertaining to land the separate property of the wife, the wife is not bound by any subsequent contract made by the husband alone, for the extension of the time limited by the terms of the agreement.</p> <p>3. School Lands—Husband and Wipe—Community Property.—One who bought from the State school lands in the name of his wife, because he had already applied for as many sections as the law entitled him to purchase in his own name, and who thus bought in pursuance of a contract with other parties, by the terms of which they also should purchase other sections, all of which were to be used by the contracting parties for mining purposes, must be presumed, in the absence of evidence, to have used community funds in acquiring the lands thus applied for in the wife’s name, and which were patented to her. If, at the time of the application to purchase, it was the intention of the husband that the land afterwards patented to the wife should belong to her, then, as to the husband and his heirs and those claiming under him with notice, the land would be regarded as the separate property of the wife.</p> <p>3. Same—Title to school land acquired by purchase from the State by a married woman, subjects the property to the same presumption that it is part of the community estate that would obtain if the title had been acquired from an individual. The fact that the statute, at the time of the purchase, prohibited the husband from acquiring more school land than he had already applied for, and that on that account he had applied for it in his wife’s name, would not, without other evidence, be sufficient to divest the land thus titled to the wife, of its community character.</p> <p>4. Same—Declarations—Evidence.—While it is true that the declaration of the husband made at the time when title to land is taken in his wife’s name, to the effect that he intended it to be her separate pr

Judges: Willie

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.