Zabel v. Schroeder

Citations

• 35 Tex. 308

Syllabus

<p>1. Part of the purchase money o£ land was payable eighteen months subsequent to the contract, but no note for the money nor other written evidence of the contract was signed by the purchaser. The vendor executed a deed to the purchaser, and recited in it the terms óf the contract; and the purchaser went into possession of the land. Hdd, that the statute of frauds is not available to the purchaser as a defense against a suit for the purchase money.</p> <p>■3. The statute of frauds should never be so construed as to make it an instrument of fraud.</p> <p>-3; To supply the predicate for secondary evidence of a deed, the plaintiff put the defendant’s attorney upon the witness stand, and asked him whether he or the defendant had the deed. The attorney refused to answer, relying upon the law of “privileged communications;” and the court below sustained his refusal. Held, that the question was proper, and should have been answered by the attorney.</p>