Shelton v. Willis

Citations

• 58 S.W. 176
• 23 Tex. Civ. App. 547
• 1900 Tex. App. LEXIS 380

Syllabus

<p>1. Trespass to Try Title Between Purchaser and Lessee of State School Lands—Improvements—Burden of Proof.</p> <p>A sale of State school lands to one who placed improvements thereon was forfeited for nonpayment of interest, and the State then leased the land to plaintiff, who purchased the improvements from the former owner. Afterwards the State sold the land to defendant as an actual settler thereon, and plaintiff (the lessee) sued him 'for the land in trespass to try title. Held, that the burden of proof was on plaintiff to show whether he purchased the improvements before or after the forfeiture, and how much of them were not so attached as to have formed part of the realty and become the property of the State by virtue of the forfeiture, and that the value of so much of them as he acquired title to amounted to $200. Rev. Stats., art. 4218s. .</p> <p>2. Same—Cancellation by Land Commissioner.</p> <p>The fact that the Commissioner of the General Land Office accepted plaintiff’s proof of ownership and value of the improvements, and thereupon canceled the award of the land to the defendant, did not shift the burden of proof from plaintiff to show their value, since that officer had not'authority to so divest title out of the defendant.</p> <p>3. Same—Value of Improvements—Conflicting Evidence—Opinion.</p> <p>The question of the value of the improvements was for the jury; and upon evidence for plaintiff showing them to be worth over $200, and evidence by defendant that in his opinion they were worth less than $100, a verdict for defendant would not be disturbed, although defendant testified that he “knew nothing of wind mills,” one of which constituted the principal item of the improvements, as no objection was made below to defendant's qualifications to testify as to value.</p> <p>4. Same—Charge of Court.</p> <p>The failure of the court to give in charge to jury the rules by which to determine whether or not the improvements constituted nonseverable fixtures, was